♦.  ^t 


>  -ik 


mm 


mc 


Please 

handle  this  volume 

with  care. 

The  University  of  Connecticut 
Libraries,  Storrs 


^»»»»»»»»» 


CONNECTICUT 
^EGE  of  PHARMACY 

\library 

\  CONN. 


TRAOmON 


3  1153  000b531M  1 


fA 


'^ 


...b 


f\ 


K 


PLEASE  NOTE 


It  has  been  necessary  to  replace  some  of  the 
original  pages  in  this  book  with  photocopy 
reproductions  because  of  damage  or 
mistreatment  by  a  previous  user. 

Replacement  of  damaged  materials  is  both 
expensive  and  time-consuming.  Please  handle 
this  volume  with  care  so  that  information  will 
not  be  lost  to  future  readers. 

Thank  you  for  helping  to  preserve  the 
University's  research  collections. 


SCIENCE    AND 
HEBREW    TRADITION 


ESSAYS 


BY 

THOM.\S   H.    HUXLEY 


NEW    YORK 

D.    APPLE  TON    AND    COMPANY 

1S95 


y 


Authorized  Edition. 


PEEFACE 

For  more  than  a  thousand  years,  the  great 
majority  of  the  most  highly  civilised  and  in- 
structed nations  in  the  world  have  confidently 
believed  and  passionately  maintained  that  certain 
writings,  which  they  entitle  sacred,  occupy 
a  unique  position  in  literature,  in  that  they 
possess  an  authority,  different  in  kind,  and  im- 
measurably superior  in  weight,  to  that  of  all  other 
books.  Age  after  age,  they  have  held  it  to  be  an 
indisputable  truth  that,  whoever  may  be  the 
ostensible  writers  of  the  Jewish,  Christian,  and 
Mahometan  scriptures,  God  Himself  is  their  real 
author ;  and,  since  their  conception  of  the  attributes 
of  the  Deity  excludes  the  possibility  of  error  and 
— at  least  in  relation  to  this  particular  matter — of 
wilful  deception,  they  have  drawn  the  logical  con- 
clusion that  the  denier  of  the  accuracy  of  any 
statement,  the  questioner  of  the  binding  force  of 
-.  any  command,  to  be  found  in  these  documents  is 
^^^ot  merely  a  fool,  but  a  blasphemer.  From  the 
O  point  of  view  of  mere  reason  he  grossly  blunders ; 
^  from  that  of  religion  he  grievously  sins. 


VI  PREFACE 

But,  if  this  dognoa  of  Eabbinical  invention  is 
well  founded ;  if,  for  example,  every  word  in  our 
Bible  has  been  dictated  by  the  Deity ;  ^  or  even,  if 
it  be  held  to  be  the  Divine  purpose  that  every 
proposition  should  be  understood  by  the  hearer  or 
reader  in  the  plain  sense  of  the  words  employed 
(and  it  seems  impossible  to  reconcile  the  Divine 
attribute  of  truthfulness  with  any  other  intention), 
a  serious  strain  upon  faith  must  arise.  More- 
over, experience  has  proved  that  the  severity  of 
this  strain  tends  to  increase,  and  in  an  even 
more  rapid  ratio,  with  the  growth  in  intelligence 
of  mankind  and  with  the  enlargement  of  the 
sphere  of  assured  knowledge  among  them. 

It  is  becoming,  if  it  has  not  become,  impossible 
for  men  of  clear  intellect  and  adequate  instruction 
to  believe,  and  it  has  ceased,  or  is  ceasing,  to  be 
possible  for  such  men  honestly  to  say  they  believe, 
that  the  universe  came  into  being  in  the  fashion 
described  in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  ;  or  to 
accept,  as  a  literal  truth,  the  story  of  the  making 
of  woman,  with  the  account  of  the  catastrophe 
which  followed  hard  upon  it,  in  the  second 
chapter ;  or  to  admit  that  the  earth  was  repeopled 
with   terrestrial   inhabitants   by   migration   from 

1  "Whoso  says  that  Moses  wrote  even  a  single  verse  [of  the 
Pentateuch]  from  his  own  knowledge,  denies  and  contemns  tho 
Word  of  God,"  bah  Sanhcdrin  99a,  cited  by  Schiirer,  Gcschichtc 
des  JildUchai  Volkcs,  Bd.  II.  p.  249.  The  account  of  tho  death 
of  Moses  in  the  last  eight  verses  of  Deuteronomy  was,  of  course, 
dictated  to  and  written  by  himself,  like  all  the  rest.  Admit 
])rophetic  inspiration  and  what  becomes  of  the  difficulty  ? 
Surely,  a  quite  unanswerable  argument. 


PREFACE  Vll 

Armenia  or  Kurdistan,  little  more  than  4,000  years 
ago,  which  is  implied  in  the  eighth  chapter;  or 
finally,  to  shape  their  conduct  in  accordance  with 
the  conviction  that  the  world  is  haunted  by 
innumerable  demons,  who  take  possession  of  men 
and  may  be  driven  out  of  them  by  exorcistic 
adjurations,  which  pervades  the  Gospels. 

Nevertheless,  if  there  is  any  justification  for 
the  dogma  of  plenary  inspiration,  the  damna- 
tory prodigality  of  even  the  Athanasian  Creed  is 
still  too  sparing.  "  Whosoever  will  be  saved " 
must  believe,  not  only  all  these  things,  but  a 
great  many  others  of  equal  repugnancy  to  com- 
mon sense  and  everyday  knowledge. 

The  doctrine  of  biblical  infallibility,  which 
involves  these  remarkable  consequences,  was 
widely  held  by  my  countrymen  within  my  recol- 
lection :  I  have  reason  to  think  that  many  persons 
of  unimpeachable  piety,  a  few  of  learning,  and 
even  some  of  intelligence,  yet  uphold  it.  But  I 
venture  to  entertain  a  doubt  whether  it  can  pro- 
duce any  champion  whose  competency  and 
'authority  would  be  recognised  beyond  the  limits 
of  the  sect,  or  theological  coterie,  to  which  he  be- 
longs. On  the  contrary,  apologetic  effort,  at 
present,  appears  to  devote  itself  to  the  end  of 
keeping  the  name  of  "  Inspiration  "  to  suggest  the 
divine  source,  and  consequent  infallibility,  of  more 
or  less  of  the  biblical  literature,  while  carefully 
emptying  the  term  of  any  definite  sense.  For 
"  plenary  inspiration  "  we  are  asked  to  substitute 


Viii  PREFACE 

a  sort  of  "  inspiration  with  limited  liability,"  the 
limit  being  susceptible  of  indefinite  fluctuation  in 
correspondence  with  the  demands  of  scientific 
criticism.  Where  this  advances  that  at  once 
retreats. 

This  Parthian  policy  is  carried  out  with  some 
dexterity ;  but,  like  other  such  manoeuvres  in  the 
face  of  a  strong  foe,  it  seems  likely  to  end  in 
disaster.  It  is  easy  to  say,  and  sounds  plausible, 
that  the  Bible  was  not  meant  to  teach  anything 
but  ethics  and  religion,  and  that  its  utterances  on 
other  matters  are  mere  obiter  dicta;  it  is  also  a 
sj^ecious  suggestion  that  inspiration,  filtering- 
through  human  brains,  must  undergo  a  kind  of 
fallibility  contamination ;  and  that  this  human 
impurity  is  responsible  for  any  errors,  the  exist- 
ence of  which  has  to  be  admitted,  however 
unwillingly. 

But  how  does  the  apologist  know  what  the  bib- 
lical writers  mtended  to  teach,  and  what  they  did 
not  intend  to  teach  ?  And  even  if  their  authority 
is  restricted  to  matters  of  faith  and  morals,  who  is 
prepared  to  deny  that  the  story  of  the  fabrication 
of  Eve,  that  of  the  lapse  from  innocence  effected 
by  a  talking  snake,  that  of  the  Deluge  and  the 
demonological  legends,  have  exercised,  and  still 
exercise,  a  profound  influence  on  Christian  theo- 
logy and  Christian  ethics  ?  The  very  apologists 
who  put  forth  this  plea  are  never  weary  of 
declaring  that  the  Divine  authority  for  the  moral 
law  is  the  only  safe  foundation  of  ethics.     But  if 


PREFACE  IX 

several  of  the  most  important  Pentateuchal  narra- 
tives prove  to  be  utterly  unworthy  of  credit,  what 
pretence  is  there  for  accepting  other  uncorrobo- 
rated stories  of  a  no  less  improbable  character? 
If  the  writers  of  the  gospels  have  taken  fiction 
for  truth,  the  survivals  of  pagan  superstition  for 
religion,  in  one  department  of  spiritual  knowledge, 
what  guarantee  have  we  for  their  infallibility  in 
other  departments  ?  If  the  "  human  element " 
must  be  admitted  to  have  already  encroached  so 
largely  beyond  the  bounds,  erstwhile  thought  to 
be  set  by  Divine  authority,  what  justification  is 
there  for  imagining  that  any  limit  can  be  set  to 
the  discovery  of  further  invasions  ? 

The  truth  is  that  the  pretension  to  infallibility, 
by  whomsoever  made,  has  done  endless  mischief; 
with  impartial  malignity  it  has  proved  a  curse, 
alike  to  those  who  have  made  it  and  those  who 
have  accepted  it;  and  its  most  baneful  shape  is 
book  infallibility.  For  sacerdotal  corporations  and 
schools  of  philosophy  are  able,  under  due  compul- 
sion of  opinion,  to  retreat  from  positions  that  have 
become  untenable ;  while  the  dead  hand  of  a  book 
sets  and  stiffens,  amidst  texts  and  formulae,  until  it 
becomes  a  mere  petrifaction,  fit  only  for  that  func- 
tion of  stumbling  block,  which  it  so  admirably  per- 
forms. Wherever  bibliolatry  has  prevailed,  bigotry 
and  cruelty  have  accompanied  it.  It  lies  at  the 
root  of  the  deep-seated,  sometimes  disguised,  but 
never  absent,  antagonism  of  all  the  varieties  of  ec- 
clesiasticism  to  the  freedom  of  thought  and  to  the 


X  PREFACE 

spirit  of  scientific  investigation.  For  those  who 
look  upon  ignorance  as  one  of  the  chief  sources  of 
evil;  and  hold  veracity,  not  merely  in  act,  hut 
in  thought,  to  be  the  one  condition  of  true  pro- 
gress, whether  moral  or  intellectual,  it  is  clear 
that  the  biblical  idol  must  go  the  way  of  all  other 
idols.  Of  infallibility,  in  all  shapes,  lay  or  clerical, 
it  is  needful  to  iterate  with  more  than  Catonic 
pertinacity,  Delenda  est. 

The  essays  contained  in  the  present  and  the 
following  volume  are,  for  the  most  part,  intended 
to  contribute,  in  however  slight  a  degree,  to  this 
process  of  deletion.  Unless  I  greatly  err,  the 
arguments  adduced  go  a  long  way  to  prove  that 
the  accounts  of  the  Creation  and  of  the  Deluge 
in  the  Hebrew  scriptures  are  mere  legends  ;  and 
further,  that  the  evidence  for  the  existence  and 
activity  of  a  demonic  world,  implicitly  and  ex- 
plicitly inculcated  throughout  the  Christian  scrip- 
tures, and  universally  held  by  the  primitive 
Churches,  is  totally  inadequate  to  justify  the  ex- 
pression of  belief  in  it. 

This  much  on  the  negative  side  of  the  discus- 
sion. On  the  positive  side,  the  essay  on  the 
"  Evolution  of  Theology,"  as  I  imagine,  shows 
cause  for  the  conclusion  that  the  Israelitic  reli- 
gion, in  the  earliest  phase  of  which  anything  is 
really  known,  is  neither  more  nor  less  rational, 
neither  better  nor  worse  ethically,  than  the  reli- 
.  gions  of   other    nations    in    a    similar  state   of 


PREFACE  XI 

civilisation  ;  that,  in  the  natural  course  of  its 
evohition,  it  reached,  in  the  prophetic  age,  an 
elevation  and  an  ethical  purity  which  have  never 
been  surpassed  ;  and  that,  since  the  new  birth  of 
the  prophetic  sjoirit,  in  the  first  century  of  our 
era,  the  course  of  Christian  dogmatic  development, 
along  its  main  lines,  has  been  essentially  retro- 
gressive. The  revived  prophetic  ideal  was  grad- 
ually overshadowed  by  the  results  of  Jewish  and 
Greek  theological  and  metaphysical  speculation, 
and  buried  beneath  old-world  superstitions  and 
liturgical  conjurations,  gi-adually  infiltrated  from 
the  pagan  surroundings  of  the  new  religion  ;  until, 
in  the  mediaeval  "  ages  of  faith,"  it  was  well-nigh 
smothered  beneath  the  monstrous  agglomeration 
of  spurious  doctrines  and  idolatrous  practices. 

The  ordinary  reader,  to  whom  these  essays  are 
addressed,  will  doubtless  be  surprised,  if  not 
shocked,  at  the  many  passages  which  expressly, 
or  by  implication,  contradict  the  notions  respect- 
ing the  age  and  authority  of  the  Hebrew  scriptures, 
and  especially  of  the  Pentateuch,  in  which  he  has 
been  brought  up,  and  which  have,  quite  recently, 
received  high  ecclesiastical  sanction.  "  Helps  to 
the  Study  of  the  Bible  "  are  proffered  to  lay  ig- 
norance and  simplicity,  and  those  who  hunger  for 
trustworthy  information  will  undoubtedly  find 
much  wholesome  food  in  the  banquet  set  forth  by 
the  Helpers.  All  the  more  pity  that  some  of  the 
bread  is  so  very  full  of  stones.     For  example,  the 


Xll  PREFACE 

commentary  on  the  Pentateuch  tells  the  student 
that  Moses  wrote  or  compiled  the  book  of  Genesis 
from  documentary  evidence  extant  in  his  time ;  that 
the  book  of  Exodus  was  written  by  him,  or  under 
his  immediate  direction  and  authority ;  that  the 
book  of  Leviticus,  if  not  written  by  him,  was  com- 
piled by  authorised  scribes  under  his  supervision ; 
that  the  book  of  Numbers  was  drawn  up  under  his 
immediate  oversight ;  that  the  book  of  Deuter- 
onomy, containing  the  last  addresses  of  the  in- 
spired legislator,  specially  recorded  by  official 
writers,  assumed  its  present  form  under  the  hand 
of  Joshua;  and  that  the  several  books  were  en- 
riched with  numerous  notes,  archaeological  and 
explanatory,  from  the  hands  of  later  editors  and 
revisers.^ 

Whether  this  view  of  the  case  implies  plenary 
inspiration,  or  not,  is  more  than  I  presume  to  say ; 
nor  do  I  wish  to  inquire  whether  there  is,  or  is 
not,  any  rational  foundation  for  it.  The  singularity 
that  impresses  me  is  the  absence  of  the  slightest 
hint  to  the  ignorant  layman  that  a  large  number 
of  biblical  scholars  of  the  highest  reputation,  of 
undeniable  comj^etency  and  sincerity,  repudiate 
eveiy  one  of  these  proj^ositions,  and  give  an  ac- 
count of  the  origin  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  of  the 
age  and  authorsliip  of  its  various  constituents 
totally  irreconcilable  with  it.  There  is  no  living 
biblical  scholar  who  can  ignore  authorities  of  the 

1  The  Oxford  Bible  for  Teachers,  '*  Helps  to  the  Study  of  the 
Bible,"  p.  10.     New  Edition,  1893. 


PREFACE  Xlll 

rank  of  Reuss  and  Wellhausen,  of  Robertson 
Smith  and  Kuenen,  without  gross  presumption ;  I 
might  even  say  without  raising  a  serious  doubt  of 
his  scientific  integrity.  But  what  is  the  general 
result  of  the  patient  study  which  these  men, 
and  many  more  such,  have  devoted,  through  long 
years,  to  the  elucidation  of  the  difficult  and  com- 
plicated problem  of  the  origin  of  the  first  five 
books  of  the  Old  Testament  ? 

An  excellent  work,  which  has  just  made  its 
appearance,  supplies  an  answer.  I  may  be 
permitted  to  say  that  it  can  hardly  be  ranked  as 
a  "shallow  infidel"  publication ;  not  the  last,  inso- 
much as  it  is  dedicated  to  the  theological  faculty 
of  the  University  of  Giessen ;  not  the  first,  since 
its  author,  Dr.  Smend,  is  a  distinguished  professor 
in  the  University  of  Gottingen. 

After  pointing  out  the  importance  of  the  ques- 
tion of  the  date  of  the  priestly  code  (that  is  to 
say  the  so-called  Levitical  Law,  which  occupies 
so  large  a  place  in  the  books  of  Exodus,  Leviti- 
cus, and  Numbers),  Dr.  Smend  says,  it  may  now 
be  considered  to  be  proved,  that  this  code  "  was 
first  made  known  by  Esra,  about  444  B.C.,  and 
raised  to  the  position  of  the  fundamental  law  of 
Judaism.  The  kernel  of  the  priestly  code  may  be 
a  few  decades  or  even  a  century  older;  but  it 
assuredly  did  not  exist  before  Deuteronomy.  .  .  . 
At  the  present  day,  it  is  almost  universally 
admitted  that  there  was  no  divine  law  book  of 


xiv  PREFACE 

public  authority  in  Israel  before  Josiah ;  especially, 
that  the  cultus  and  religious  customs  rested 
upon  no  divine  law  book ;  and  that  the  chosen 
representatives  of  religion,  before  the  exile,  knew 
nothing  whatever  of  such  a  law  book.i 

"  Deuteronomy  is  the  result  of  the  reformatory 
movement  set  afoot  by  the  Prophets.  In  fact, 
the  Prophets,  though  unintentionally,  became  the 
founders  of  Judaism  and  its  religion  of  legality. 
Therein  lies  their  far-reaching  historical  influ- 
ence. But  the  Prophets  stand  in  complete  antag- 
onism to  old  Israel.  They  foretold  the  fall  of 
kingdom  and  people,  and  so  commenced  a  bitter 
warfare  against  the  traditional  conceptions  of 
Israelitic  religion.  On  the  other  hand,  they 
were  much  more  than  founders  of  the  Jewish 
community:  they  rise  high  above  later  Juda- 
ism ;  in  them,  the  religion  of  the  Old  Testament 
substantially  approaches  Christianity."   (I.  c.  p.  9.) 

If  I  were  to  publish  "  Helps  to  the  Study  of 
Zoology "  for  popular  use,  in  which  the  progress 
of  science  in  the  last  fifty  years  was  ignored  and 
every  recent  authority  passed  over  in  silence,  I 
am  afraid,  and  indeed  hope,  that  I  should  get  into 
great  trouble.  But  to  be  sure  I  should  be  judged 
by  mere  lay  standards  of  right  and  wrong. 

T.  H.  H. 

lloDESLEA,  Eastbourne 
October  9th,  1893. 

1  8mend,  Lehrbuch  der  Alttcstavicntlichen ReligionsgescTiichtCf 
1893,  p.  8.     (Sammlung  Theologischer  Lehrbiicher.) 


CONTENTS 


I 

PA  OK 
ON   THE   METHOD    OF   ZADIG  [1880J 1 

(Lecture  at  the  Working  Men's  College,  Gieat 
Ormond  Street.) 


II 

THE   RISE  AND   PROGRESS   OF  TAL^ONTOLOGY  [1881]  ...        24 

III 

LECTURES    ON    EVOLUTION  [NEW    YORK,    1876] 46 


IV 


THE   INTERPRETERS   OF   GENESIS   AND  THE   INTERPIIETERS 

OF  NATURE  [1885] 139 


xvi  CONTENTS 

V 

PAP.E 

MR.  GLADSTONE  AND   GENEisIS   [1886] 164 


VI 

THE      LIGHTS      OF      THE     CHURCH     AND     THE     LIGHT     OF 

SCIENCE   [1890] 201 


VII 
hasisadea's  adventuke  [1891] 239 


7III 


THE    EVOLITTION    OF    THEOLOGY  :      AN    ANTHROPOLOGICAL 

STUiy  [1886] 287 


ON  THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIQ 

[1880] 

RETROSPECTIVE    PROPHECY    AS    A    FUNCTION    OF 
SCIENCE 

"  Une  marque  plus  sure  que  toutes  celles  de  Zadig." — Cuvier.' 

It  is  an  usual  and  a  commendable  practice  to  pre- 
face the  discussion  of  the  views  of  a  philosophic 
thinker  by  some  account  of  the  man  and  of  the 
circumstances  which  shaped  his  life  and  coloured 
his  way  of  looking  at  things ;  but,  though  Zadig  is 
cited  in  one  of  the  most  important  chapters  of 
Cuvier's  greatest  work,  little  is  known  about  him, 
and  that  little  might  perhaps  be  better  authenti- 
cated than  it  is. 

It  is  said  that  he  lived  at  Babylon  in  the  time 
of  King  Moabdar ;  but  the  name  of  Moabdar  does 
not  appear  in  the  list  of  Babylonian  sovereigns 

^  '*  Discours  sur  les  revolutions  de  la  surface  du  globe." 
Rccherchcs  sur  les  Osscmcns  Fossiles,  Ed.  iv.  t.  i.  p.  185. 
90 


2  ON  THE  METHOD   OF  ZADIG  i 

brought  to  light  by  the  patience  and  the  industry 
of  the  decipherers  of  cuneiform  inscriptions  in 
these  later  years ;  nor  indeed  ain  I  aware  that 
there  is  any  other  authority  for  his  existence  than 
that  of  the  biographer  of  Zadig,  one  Arouet  de 
Voltaire,  among  whose  more  conspicuous  merits 
strict  historical  accuracy  is  perhaps  hardly  to  be 
reckoned. 

Happily  Zadig  is  in  the  position  of  a  great  many 
other  philosophers.  What  he  was  like  when  he 
was  in  the  flesh,  indeed  whether  he  existed  at  all, 
are  matters  of  no  great  consequence.  What  we 
care  about  in  a  light  is  that  it  shows  the  way,  not 
whether  it  is  lamp  or  candle,  tallow  or  wax.  Our 
only  real  interest  in  Zadig  lies  in  the  conceptions 
of  which  he  is  the  putative  father;  and  his 
biographer  has  stated  these  with  so  much  clearness 
and  vivacious  illustration,  that  we  need  hardly  feel 
a  pang,  even  if  critical  research  should  prove  King 
Moabdar  and  all  the  rest  of  the  story  to  be 
unhistorical,  and  reduce  Zadig  himself  to  the 
shadowy  condition  of  a  solar  myth. 

Voltaire  tells  us  that,  disenchanted  with  life  by 
sundry  domestic  misadventures,  Zadig  withdrew 
from  the  turmoil  of  Babylon  to  a  secluded  retreat 
on  the  banks  of  the  Euphrates,  where  he  beguiled 
his  solitude  by  the  study  of  nature.  The  manifold 
wonders  of  the  world  of  life  had  a  particular  at- 
traction for  the  lonely  student ;  incessant  and 
patient  observation  of   the  plants    and  animals 


X  ON   THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIG  3 

about  him  sharpened  his  naturally  good 
powers  of  observation  and  of  reasoning ;  until, 
at  length,  he  acquired  a  sagacity  which  enabled 
him  to  perceive  endless  minute  differences  among 
objects  which,  to  the  untutored  eye,  appeared 
absolutely  alike. 

It  might  have  been  expected  that  this  enlarge- 
ment of  the  powers  of  the  mind  and  of  its  store  of 
natural  knowledge  could  tend  to  nothing  but  the 
increase  of  a  man's  own  welfare  and  the  good  of 
his  fellow-men.  But  Zadig  was  fated  to  experience 
the  vanity  of  such  expectations. 

"  One  day,  walking  near  a  little  wood,  he  saw,  hastening  that 
way,  one  of  the  Queen's  chief  eunuchs,  followed  by  a  troop  of 
officials,  who  appeared  to  be  in  the  greatest  anxiety,  running 
hither  and  thither  like  men  distraught,  in  search  of  some  lost 
treasure, 

"  '  Young  man,'  cried  the  eunuch,  'have  you  seen  the  Queen's 
dog  ? '  Zadig  answered  modestly,  '  A  bitch,  I  think,  not  a  dog. ' 

*  Quite  right, '  replied  the  eunuch  ;  and  Zadig  continued,  '  A 
very  small  spaniel  who  has  lately  had  puppies  ;  she  limps  with 
the  left  foreleg,  and  has  very  long  ears. '  '  Ah  !  you  have  seen 
her  then,'  said  the  breathless  eunuch.      'No,'  answered  Zadig, 

*  I  have  not  seen  her  ;  and  I  really  was  not  aware  that  the  Queen 
possessed  a  spaniel.' 

' '  By  an  odd  coincidence,  at  the  very  same  time,  the  handsom- 
est horse  in  the  King's  stables  broke  away  from  his  groom  in 
the  Babylonian  plains.  The  grand  huntsman  and  all  his  staff 
were  seeking  the  horse  with  as  much  anxiety  as  the  eunuch  and 
his  people  the  spaniel  ;  and  the  grand  huntsman  asked  Zadig  if 
he  had  not  seen  the  King's  horse  go  that  way. 

"  '  A  first-rate  galloper,  small-hoofed,  five  feet  high  ;  tail  three 
feet  and  a  half  long  ;  cheek  pieces  of  the  bit  of  twenty-three 
carat  gold  ;  shoes  silver  ? '  said  Zadig. 


4  ON  THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIG  I 

**  *  "Which  way  did  he  go  ?  Where  is  he  ? '  cried  the  grand 
huntsman. 

"  'I  have  not  seen  anything  of  the  horse,  and  I  never  heard 
of  him  before,'  replied  Zadig. 

"  The  grand  huntsman  and  the  chief  eunuch  made  sure  that 
Zadig  had  stolen  both  the  King's  horse  and  the  Queen's  spaniel, 
so  they  haled  him  before  the  High  Court  of  Desterham,  which 
at  once  condemned  him  to  the  knout,  and  transportation  for  life 
to  Siberia.  But  the  sentence  was  hardly  pronounced  when  the 
lost  horse  and  spaniel  were  found.  So  the  judges  were  under 
the  painful  necessity  of  reconsidering  their  decision  :  but  they 
fined  Zadig  four  hundred  ounces  of  gold  for  saying  he  had  seen 
that  which  he  had  not  seen. 

* '  The  first  thing  was  to  pay  the  fine  ;  afterwards  Zadig  was 
permitted  to  open  his  defence  to  the  court,  which  he  did  in  the 
following  terms : 

'•  'Stars  of  justice,  abysses  of  knowledge,  mirrors  of  truth, 
whose  gravity  is  as  that  of  lead,  whose  inflexibility  is  as  that  of 
iron,  who  rival  the  diamond  in  clearness,  and  possess  no  little 
affinity  with  gold  ;  since  I  am.  permitted  to  address  your  august 
assembly,  I  swear  by  Ormuzd  that  I  have  never  seen  the  respect- 
able lady  dog  of  the  Queen,  nor  beheld  the  sacrosanct  horse  of 
the  King  of  Kings. 

"  '  This  is  what  happened.  I  was  taking  a  walk  towards  the 
little  wood  near  which  I  subsequently  had  the  honour  to  meet 
the  venerable  chief  eunuch  and  the  most  illustrious  grand  hunts- 
man. I  noticed  the  track  of  an  animal  in  the  sand,  and  it  was 
easy  to  see  that  it  was  that  of  a  small  dog.  Long  faint  streaks 
upon  the  little  elevations  of  sand  between  the  footmarks  con- 
vinced me  that  it  was  a  she  dog  with  pendent  dugs,  showing 
that  she  must  have  had  puppies  not  many  days  since.  Other 
scrapings  of  the  sand,  which  always  lay  close  to  the  marks  of  the 
forepaws,  indicated  that  she  had  very  long  ears  ;  and,  as  the  im- 
print of  one  foot  Was  always  fainter  than  those  of  the  other 
three,  I  judged  that  the  lady  dog  of  our  august  Queen  was,  if  I 
may  venture  to  say  so,  a  little  lame. 

"  '  With  respect  to  the  horse  of  the  King  of  Kings,  permit  me 
to  observe  that,  wandering  through  the  paths  which  traverse  tho 


I  ON   THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIG  5 

wood,  I  noticed  the  marks  of  horse-shoes.  They  were  all  equi- 
distant. "Ah!  "said  I,  "this  is  a  famous  galloper."  In  a 
narrow  alley,  only  seven  feet  wide,  the  dust  upon  the  trunks  of 
the  trees  was  a  little  disturbed  at  three  feet  and  a  half  from  the 
middle  of  the  path.  "This  horse,"  said  I  to  myself,  "had  a 
tail  three  feet  and  a  half  long,  and,  lashing  it  from  one  side  to 
the  other,  he  has  swept  away  the  dust."  Branches  of  the  trees 
met  overhead  at  the  height  of  five  feet,  and  under  them  I  saw 
newly  fallen  leaves  ;  so  I  knew  that  the  horse  had  brushed  some 
of  the  branches,  and  was  therefore  five  feet  high.  As  to  his  bit, 
it  must  have  been  made  of  twenty-three  carat  gold,  for  he  had 
rubbed  it  against  a  stone,  which  turned  out  to  be  a  touchstone, 
with  the  properties  of  which  I  am  familiar  by  experiment. 
Lastly,  by  the  marks  which  his  shoes  left  upon  pebbles  of 
another  kind,  I  was  led  to  think  that  his  shoes  were  of  fine 
silver.' 

"All  the  judges  admired  Zadig's  profound  and  subtle  discern- 
ment ;  and  the  fame  of  it  reached  even  the  King  and  the  Queen. 
From  the  ante-rooms  to  the  presence-chamber,  Zadig's  name  was 
in  everybody's  mouth  ;  and,  although  many  of  the  magi  were  of 
opinion  that  he  ought  to  be  burnt  as  a  sorcerer,  the  King  com- 
manded that  the  four  hundred  ounces  of  gold  which  he  had 
been  fined  should  be  restored  to  him.  So  the  ofiicers  of  the 
court  went  in  state  with  the  four  hundred  ounces  ;  only  they 
retained  three  hundred  and  ninety-eight  for  legal  expenses,  and 
their  servants  expected  fees." 

Those  who  are  interested  in  learning  more  of 
the  fateful  history  of  Zadig  must  turn  to  the 
original;  we  are  dealing  with  him  only  as  a 
philosopher,  and  this  brief  excerpt  suffices  for  the 
exemplification  of  the  nature  of  his  conclusions 
and  of  the  methods  by  which  he  arrived  at  them. 

These  conclusions  may  be  said  to  be  of  the 
nature  of  retrospective  prophecies  ;  though  it  is 
perhaps  a  little  hazardous  to  employ  phraseology 


6  ON   THE   METHOD   OF  ZADIG  I 

wliich  perilously  suggests  a  contradiction  in  terms 
— the  word  "prophecy"  being  so  constantly,  in 
ordinary  use,  restricted  to  "  foretelling."  Strictly, 
however,  the  term  prophecy  applies  as  much  to 
outspeaking  as  to  foretelling;  and,  even  in  the 
restricted  sense  of  "  divination,"  it  is  obvious  that 
the  essence  of  the  prophetic  operation  does  not 
lie  in  its  backward  or  forward  relation  to  the 
course  of  time,  but  in  the  fact  that  it  is  the 
apprehension  of  that  which  lies  out  of  the  sphere 
of  immediate  knowledge ;  the  seeing  of  that  which, 
to  the  natural  sense  of  the  seer,  is  invisible. 

The  foreteller  asserts  that,  at  some  future  time, 
a  properly  situated  observer  will  witness  certain 
events ;  the  clairvoyant  declares  that,  at  this 
present  time,  certain  things  are  to  be  witnessed  a 
thousand  miles  away ;  the  retrospective  prophet 
(would  that  there  were  such  a  word  as  "back- 
teller!")  affirms  that,  so  many  hours  or  years  ago, 
such  and  such  things  were  to  be  seen.  In  all 
these  cases,  it  is  only  the  relation  to  time  which 
alters — the  process  of  divination  beyond  the  limits 
of  possible  direct  knowledge  remains  the  same. 

No  doubt  it  was  their  instinctive  recognition  of 
the  analogy  between  Zadig's  results  and  those  ob- 
tained by  authorised  inspiration  which  inspired  the 
Babylonian  magi  with  the  desire  to  burn  the  philoso- 
pher. Zadig  admitted  that  he  had  never  either  seen 
or  heard  of  the  horse  of  the  king  or  of  the  spaniel 
of  the  queen ;  and  yet  he  ventured  to  assert  in 


I  ON  THE   METHOD  OF  ZADia  7 

the  most  positive  manner  that  animals  answering 
to  their  description  did  actually  exist  and  ran 
about  the  plains  of  Babylon.  If  his  method  was 
good  for  the  divination  of  the  course  of  events  ten 
hours  old,  why  should  it  not  be  good  for  those  of 
ten  years  or  ten  centuries  past ;  nay,  might  it  not 
extend  ten  thousand  years  and  justify  the  impious 
in  meddling  with  the  traditions  of  Oannes  and  the 
fish,  and  all  the  sacred  foundations  of  Babylonian 
cosmogony  ? 

But  this  was  not  the  worst.  There  was  another 
consideration  which  obviously  dictated  to  the  more 
thoughtful  of  the  magi  the  property  of  burning 
Zadig  out  of  hand.  His  defence  was  worse  than 
his  offence.  It  showed  that  his  mode  of  divination 
was  fraught  with  danger  to  magianism  in  general. 
Swollen  with  the  pride  of  human  reason,  he  had 
ignored  the  established  canons  of  magian  lore ;  and, 
trusting  to  what  after  all  was  mere  carnal  common 
sense,  he  professed  to  lead  men  to  a  deeper  insight 
into  nature  than  magian  wisdom,  with  all  its 
lofty  antagonism  to  everything  common,  had  ever 
reached.  What,  in  fact,  lay  at  the  foundation  of 
all  Zadig's  arguments  but  the  coarse  commonplace 
assumption,  upon  which  every  act  of  our  daily 
lives  is  based,  that  we  may  conclude  from  an  effect 
to  the  pre- existence  of  a  cause  competent  to  pro- 
duce that  effect  ? 

The  tracks  were  exactly  like  those  which  dogs 
and  horses  leave ;  therefore  they  were  the  effects 


8  ON   THE  METHOD   OF  ZADIG  I 

of  such  animals  as  causes.  The  marks  at  the  sides 
of  the  fore-prints  of  the  dog  track  were  exactly 
such  as  would  be  produced  by  long  trailing  ears ; 
therefore  the  dog's  long  ears  were  the  causes  of 
these  marks — and  so  on.  Nothing  can  be  more 
hopelessly  vulgar,  more  unlike  the  majestic  devel- 
opment of  a  system  of  grandly  unintelligible  con- 
clusions from  sublimely  inconceivable  premisses 
such  as  delights  the  magian  heart.  In  fact, 
Zadig's  method  was  nothing  but  the  method  of  all 
mankind.  Retrospective  prophecies,  far  more 
astonishing  for  their  minute  accuracy  than  those 
of  Zadig,  are  familiar  to  those  who  have  watched 
the  daily  life  of  nomadic  people. 

From  freshly  broken  twigs,  crushed  leaves,  dis- 
turbed pebbles,  and  imprints  hardly  discernible  by 
the  untrained  eye,  such  graduates  in  the  University 
of  Nature  will  divine,  not  only  the  fact  that  a 
party  has  passed  that  way,  but  its  strength,  its 
composition,  the  course  it  took,  and  the  number  of 
hours  or  days  which  have  elapsed  since  it  passed. 
But  they  are  able  to  do  this  because,  like  Zadig, 
they  perceive  endless  minute  differences  where  un- 
trained eyes  discern  nothing ;  and  because  the  un- 
conscious logic  of  common  sense  compels  them  to 
account  for  these  effects  by  the  causes  which 
they  know  to  be  competent  to  produce  them. 

And  such  mere  methodised  savagery  was  to  dis- 
cover the  hidden  things  of  nature  better  than  a 
priori   deductions  from  the  nature  of  Ormuzd — 


I  ON  THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIQ  9 

perhaps  to  give  a  history  of  the  past,  in  which 
Oaiines  Avould  be  altogether  ignored  1  Decidedly 
it  were  better  to  burn  this  man  at  once. 

If  instinct,  or  an  unwonted  use  of  reason,  led 
Moabdar's  magi  to  this  conclusion  two  or  three 
thousand  years  ago,  all  that  can  be  said  is  that 
subsequent  history  has  fully  justified  them.  For 
the  rigorous  application  of  Zadig's  logic  to  the 
results  of  accurate  and  long-continued  observation 
has  founded  all  those  sciences  which  have  been 
termed  historical  or  palsetiological,  because  they 
are  retrospectively  prophetic  and  strive  towards 
the  reconstruction  in  human  imagination  of  events 
which  have  vanished  and  ceased  to  be. 

History,  in  the  ordinary  acceptation  of  the  word, 
is  based  upon  the  interpretation  of  documentary 
evidence ;  and  documents  would  have  no 
evidential  value  unless  historians  were  justified 
in  their  assumption  that  they  have  come  into 
existence  by  the  operation  of  causes  similar  to 
those  of  which  documents  are,  in  our  present 
experience,  the  effects.  If  a  written  history  can 
be  produced  otherwise  than  by  human  agency,  or  if 
the  man  who  wrote  a  given  document  was  actu- 
ated by  other  than  ordinary  human  motives,  such 
documents  are  of  no  more  evidential  value  than 
so  many  arabesques. 

Archaeology,  which  takes  up  the  thread  of 
history  beyond  the  point  at  which  documentary 
evidence  fails  us,  could  have  no  existence,  except 


10  ON   THE   METHOD   OF  ZADIQ  I 

for  our  well  grounded  confidence  that  monuments 
and  works  of  art  or  artifice,  have  never  been  pro- 
duced by  causes  different  in  kind  from  those  to 
which  they  now  owe  their  origin.  And  geology, 
which  traces  back  the  course  of  history  beyond 
the  limits  of  archaeology,  could  tell  us  nothing 
except  for  the  assumption  that,  millions  of  years 
ago,  water,  heat,  gravitation,  friction,  animal  and 
vegetable  life,  caused  effects  of  the  same  kind  as 
they  now  cause.  Nay,  even  physical  astronomy, 
is  so  far  as  it  takes  us  back  to  the  uttermost 
point  of  time  which  palaetiological  science  can 
reach,  is  founded  uj)on  the  same  assumption.  If 
the  law  of  gravitation  ever  failed  to  be  true,  even 
to  a  small  extent,  for  that  period,  the  calculations 
of  the  astronomer  have  no  application. 

The  power  of  prediction,  of  prospective  pro- 
phecy, is  that  which  is  commonly  regarded  as 
the  great  prerogative  of  physical  science.  And 
truly  it  is  a  wonderful  fact  that  one  can  go  into 
a  shop  and  buy  for  a  small  price  a  book,  the 
"  Nautical  Almanac,"  which  will  foretell  the 
exact  position  to  be  occupied  by  one  of  Jupiter's 
moons  six  months  hence ;  nay,  more,  that,  if  it 
were  worth  while,  the  Astronomer-Royal  could 
furnish  us  with  as  infallible  a  prediction  applicable 
to  1980  or  2980. 

But  astronomy  is  not  less  remarkable  for  its 
power  of  retrospective  prophecy. 

Thales,  oldest  of  Greek  philosophers,  the  dates 


I  ON   THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIG  11 

of  whose  birth  and  death  are  uncertain,  but  who 
flourished  about  600  B.C.,  is  said  to  ha,ve  foretold 
an  eclipse  of  the  sun  which  took  place  in  his  time 
durinof-   a   battle   between  the    Medes    and    the 

o 

Lydians.  Sir  George  Airy  has  written  a  very 
learned  and  interesting  memoir  ^  in  which  he 
proves  that  such  an  eclipse  was  visible  in  Lydia 
on  the  afternoon  of  the  28th  of  May  in  the  year 
585  B.C. 

No  one  doubts  that,  on  the  day  and  at  the 
hour  mentioned  by  the  Astronomer-Royal,  the 
people  of  Lydia  saw  the  face  of  the  sun 
totally  obscured.  But,  though  we  implicitly  be- 
lieve this  retrospective  prophecy,  it  is  incapable 
of  verification.  In  the  total  absence  of  historical 
records,  it  is  impossible  even  to  conceive  any 
means  of  ascertaining  directly  whether  the  eclipse 
of  Thales  happened  or  not.  All  that  can  be  said 
is,  that  the  prospective  prophecies  of  the  astrono- 
mer are  always  verified  ;  and  that,  inasmuch  as 
his  retrospective  prophecies  are  the  result  of 
following  backwards,  the  very  same  method  as 
that  which  invariably  leads  to  verified  results, 
when  it  is  worked  forwards,  there  is  as  much 
reason  for  placing  full  confidence  in  the  one  as  in 
the  other.  [Retrospective  prophecy  is  therefore  a 
legitimate  function  of  astronomical  science  ;  and 
if  it  is  legitimate  for  one  science  it  is  legitimate  for 

^  "On  the  Eclipses   of  Agathocles,    Tliales,   and   Xerxes," 
Fhilosophical  Transactions^  vol.  cxliii. 


12  ON  THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIQ  I 

all;  the  fundamental  axiom  on  which  it  rests, 
the  constancy  of  the  order  of  nature,  being  the 
common  foundation  of  all  scientific  thought. 
Indeed,  if  there  can  be  grades  in  legitimacy, 
certain  branches  of  science  have  the  advantage 
over  astronomy,  in  so  far  as  their  retrospective 
prophecies  are  not  only  susceptible  of  verification, 
but  are  sometimes  strikingly  verified. 

Such  a  science  exists  in  that  application  of  the 
principles  of  biology  to  the  interpretation  of  the 
animal  and  vegetable  remains  imbedded  in  the 
rocks  which  compose  the  surface  of  the  globe, 
which  is  called  Palaeontology. 

At  no  very  distant  time,  the  question  whether 
these  so-called  "  fossils,"  were  really  the  remains 
of  animals  and  plants  was  hotly  disputed.  Very 
learned  persons  maintained  that  they  were 
nothing  of  the  kind,  but  a  sort  of  concretion,  or 
crystallisation,  which  had  taken  place  within 
the  stone  in  which  they  are  found ;  and  which 
simulated  the  forms  of  animal  and  vegetable  life, 
just  as  frost  on  a  window-pane  imitates  vegetation. 
At  the  present  day,  it  would  probably  be  impossi- 
ble to  find  any  sane  advocate  of  this  opinion ;  and 
the  fact  is  rather  surprising,  that  among  the 
people  from  whom  the  circle-squarers,  perpetual- 
motioners,  flat-earth  men  and  the  like,  are 
recruited,  to  say  nothing  of  table-turners  and 
spirit -rappers,  somebody  has  not  perceived  the 
easy  avenue  to  nonsensical  notoriety  open  to  any 


1  ON   THE   METHOD   OF  ZADIG  13 

one  who  will  take  up  the  good  old  doctrine,  that 
fossils  are  all  lusus  naturce. 

The  position  would  be  impregnable,  inas- 
much as  it  is  quite  impossible  to  prove  the  con- 
trary. If  a  man  choose  to  maintain  that  a  fossil 
oyster  shell,  in  spite  of  its  correspondence,  down 
to  every  minutest  particular,  with  that  of  an 
oyster  fresh  taken  out  of  the  sea,  was  never 
tenanted  by  a  living  oyster,  but  is  a  mineral 
concretion,  there  is  no  demonstrating  his  error. 
All  that  can  be  done  is  to  show  him  that,  by  a  parity 
of  reasoning,  he  is  bound  to  admit  that  a  heap  of 
oyster  shells  outside  a  fishmonger's  door  may  also 
be  "  sports  of  nature,"  and  that  a  mutton  bone  in  a 
dust-bin  may  have  had  the  like  origin.  And  when 
you  cannot  prove  that  people  are  wrono-,  but 
only  that  they  are  absurd,  the  best  course  is  to  let 
them  alone. 

The  whole  fabric  of  palaeontology,  in  fact, 
falls  to  the  ground  unless  we  admit  the  validity 
of  Zadig's  great  principle,  that  like  effects  imply 
like  causes,  and  that  the  process  of  reasonino* 
from  a  shell,  or  a  tooth,  or  a  bone,  to  the  nature 
of  the  animal  to  which  it  belonged,  rests  absolutely 
on  the  assumption  that  the  likeness  of  this  shell, 
or  tooth,  or  bone,  to  that  of  some  animal  with 
which  we  are  already  acquainted,  is  such  that  we 
are  justified  in  inferring  a  corresi3onding  degree  of 
likeness  in  the  rest  of  the  two  organisms.  It  is  on 
this  very  simple  principle,  and  not  upon  imaginary 


14  ON   THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIG  i 

laws  of  physiological  correlation,  about  which,  in 
most  cases,  we  know  nothing  whatever,  that  the  so- 
called  restorations  of  the  palseontologist  are  based. 

Abundant  illustrations  of  this  truth  will  occur 
to  every  one  who  is  familiar  with  palaeontology  ; 
none  is  more  suitable  than  the  case  of  the  so- 
called  Bdemnites.  In  the  early  days  of  the  study 
of  fossils,  this  name  was  given  to  certain  elon- 
gated stony  bodies,  ending  at  one  extremity  in  a 
conical  point,  and  truncated  at  the  other,  which 
were  commonly  reputed  to  be  thunderbolts,  and 
as  such  to  have  descended  from  the  sky.  They 
are  common  enough  in  some  parts  of  England; 
and,  in  the  condition  in  which  they  are  ordinarily 
found,  it  might  be  difficult  to  give  satisfactory 
reasons  for  denying  them  to  be  merely  mineral 
bodies. 

Thay  appear,  in  fact,  to  consist  of  nothing  but 
concentric  layers  of  carbonate  of  lime,  disposed  in 
subcrystalline  fibres,  or  prisms,  perpendicular  to 
the  layers.  Among  a  great  number  of  specimens 
of  these  Belemnites,  however,  it  was  soon  observed 
that  some  showed  a  conical  cavity  at  the  blunt 
end  ;  and,  in  still  better  preserved  specimens,  this 
cavity  appeared  to  be  divided  into  chambers  by 
delicate  saucer-shaped  partitions,  situated  at 
regular  intervals  one  above  the  other.  Now  there 
is  no  mineral  body  which  presents  any  structure 
comparable  to  this,  and  the  conclusion  suggested 
itself  that  the  Belemnites  must  be  the  effects  of 


I  ON  THE   METHOD   OF  ZADIQ  15 

causes  other  than  those  which  are  at  work  in 
inorganic  nature.  On  close  examination,  the 
saucer-shaped  partitions  were  proved  to  be  all 
perforated  at  one  point,  and  the  perforations  being 
situated  exactly  in  the  same  line,  the  chambers 
were  seen  to  be  traversed  by  a  canal,  or  si^hunoley 
which  thus  connected  the  smallest  or  aphical 
chamber  with  the  largest.  There  is  nothing  like 
this  in  the  vegetable  world ;  but  an  exactly  cor- 
responding structure  is  met  with  in  the  shells  of 
two  kinds  of  existing  animals,  the  pearly  Nautilus 
and  the  Sjnrula,  and  only  in  them.  These 
animals  belong  to  the  same  division — the 
Cej)hal<ypoda — as  the  cuttle-fish,  the  squid,  and 
the  octopus.  But  they  are  the  only  existing 
members  of  the  group  which  possess  chambered, 
siphunculated  shells ;  and  it  is  utterly  impossible 
to  trace  any  physiological  connection  between  the 
very  peculiar  structural  characters  of  a  cephalopod 
and  the  presence  of  a  chambered  shell.  In  fact, 
the  squid  has,  instead  of  any  such  shell,  a  horny 
"  pen,"  the  cuttle-fish  has  the  so-called  "  cuttle- 
bone,"  and  the  octopus  has  no  shell,  or,  at  most, 
a  mere  rudiment  of  one. 

Nevertheless,  seeing  that  there  is  nothing  in 
nature  at  all  like  the  chambered  shell  of  the 
Belemnite,  except  the  shells  of  the  Nautilus  and 
of  the  Sjnrtcla,  it  was  legitimate  to  prophesy  that 
the  animal  from  which  the  fossil  proceeded  must 
have  belonged  to  the  group  of  the  Ce^phalojjoda, 


16  ON  THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIG  I 

Nautilus  and  Spirula  are  both  very  rare  animals, 
but  the  progress  of  investigation  brought  to  light 
the  singular  fact,  that,  though  each  has  the  char- 
acteristic cephalopodous  organisation,  it  is  very 
different  from  the  other.  The  shell  of  Nautilus  is 
external,  that  of  Spirula  internal;  Nautilus  has 
four  gills,  SpiriUa  two ;  Nautilus  has  multitudinous 
tentacles,  Spirula  has  only  ten  arms  beset  with 
horny-rimmed  suckers;  Spirula,  like  the  squids 
and  cuttlefishes,  which  it  closely  resembles,  has  a 
bag  of  ink  which  it  squirts  out  to  cover  its  retreat 
when  alarmed ;  Nautilus  has  none. 

No  amount  of  physiological  reasoning  could 
enable  any  one  to  say  whether  the  animal  which 
fabricated  the  Belemnite  was  more  like  Nautilus, 
or  more  like  Spirula.  But  the  accidental  dis- 
covery of  Belemnites  in  due  connection  with  black 
elongated  masses  which  were  certainly  fossilised 
ink-bags,  inasmuch  as  the  ink  could  be  ground  up 
and  used  for  painting  as  well  as  if  it  were  recent 
sepia,  settled  the  question ;  and  it  became  perfectly 
safe  to  prophesy  that  the  creature  which  fabricated 
the  Belemnite  was  a  two-gilled  cephalopod  with 
suckers  on  its  arms,  and  with  all  the  other  essen- 
tial features  of  our  living  squids,  cuttlefishes,  and 
Spirulce,  The  palaeontologist  was,  by  this  time, 
able  to  speak  as  confidently  about  the  animal  of  the 
Belemnite,  as  Zadig  was  respecting  the  queen's 
spaniel.  He  could  give  a  very  fair  description 
of  its  external  appearance,  and  even  enter  pretty 


I  ON  THE  METHOD   OF  ZADIQ  17 

fully  into  the  details  of  its  internal  organisatioa, 
and  yet  could  declare  that  neither  he,  nor  any  one 
else,  had  ever  seen  one.-  And  as  the  queen's 
spaniel  was  found,  so  happily  has  the  animal  of 
the  Belemnite ;  a  few  exceptionally  preserved 
specimens  having  been  discovered,  which  com- 
pletely verify  the  retrospective  prophecy  of 
those  who  interpreted  the  facts  of  the  case  by  due 
application  of  the  method  of  Zadig. 

These  Belemnites  flourished  in  prodigious  abun- 
dance in  the  seas  of  the  mesozoic,  or  secondary, 
age  of  the  world's  geological  history  ;  but  no  trace 
of  them  has  been  found  in  any  of  the  tertiary 
deposits,  and  they  appear  to  have  died  out  to- 
wards the  close  of  the  mesozoic  epoch.  The 
method  of  Zadig,  therefore,  applies  in  full  force  to 
the  events  of  a  period  which  is  immeasurably 
remote,  which  long  preceded  the  origin  of  the 
most  conspicuous  mountain  masses  of  the  present 
world,  and  the  deposition,  at  the  bottom  of  the 
ocean,  of  the  rocks  which  form  the  greater  part  of 
the  soil  of  our  present  continents.  The  Euphrates 
itself,  at  the  mouth  of  which  Oannes  landed,  is  a 
thing  of  yesterday  compared  with  a  Belemnite ; 
and  even  the  liberal  chronology  of  magian  cos- 
mogony fixes  the  beginning  of  the  world  only  at  a 
time  when  other  applications  of  Zadig's  method 
afford  convincing  evidence  that,  could  we  have 
been  there  to  see,  things  would  have  looked  very 
much  as  they  do  now.     Truly  the  magi  were  wise 

91 


18  ON  THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIG  i 

in  their  generation;  they  foresaw  rightly  that 
this  pestilent  application  of  the  principles  of 
common  sense,  inaugurated  by  Zadig,  would 
be   their  ruin. 

But  it  may  be  said  that  the  method  of  Zadig, 
which  is  simple  reasoning  from  analogy,  does  not 
account  for  the  most  striking  feats  of  modern 
palaeontology — the  reconstruction  of  entire  animals 
from  a  tooth  or  perhaps  a  fragment  of  a  bone  ;  and 
it  may  be  justly  urged  that  Cuvier,  the  great 
master  of  this  kind  of  investigation,  gave  a  very 
different  account  of  the  process  which  yielded 
such  remarkable  results. 

Cuvier  is  not  the  first  man  of  ability  who  has 
failed  to  make  his  own  mental  processes  clear  to 
himself,  and  he  will  not  be  the  last.  The  matter 
can  be  easily  tested.  Search  the  eight  volumes  of 
the  "  Recherches  sur  les  Ossemens  Fossiles  "  from 
cover  to  cover,  and  nothing  but  the  application  of 
the  method  of  Zadig  will  be  found  in  the  argu- 
ments by  which  a  fragment  of  a  skeleton  is  made 
to  reveal  the  characters  of  the  animal  to  which  it 
belonged. 

There  is  one  well-known  case  which  may  repre- 
sent all.  It  is  an  excellent  illustration  of  Cuvier's 
sagacity,  and  he  evidently  takes  some  pride  in 
telling  his  story  about  it.  A  split  slab  of  stone 
arrived  from  the  quarries  of  Montmartre,  the  two 
halves  of  which  contained  the  greater  part  of  the 
skeleton  of  a  small  animal.     On  careful  examina- 


I  ON   THE  METHOD   OF  ZADIG  19 

tions  of  the  characters  of  the  teeth  and  of  the 
lower  jaw,  which  happened  to  be  exposed,  Cuvier 
assured  himself  that  they  presented  such  a  very 
close  resemblance  to  the  corresponding  parts  in  the 
living  opossums  that  he  at  once  assigned  the  fossil 
to  that  genus. 

Now  the  opossums  are  unlike  most  mammals  in 
that  they  possess  two  bones  attached  to  the  fore 
part  of  the  pelvis,  which  are  commonly  called 
"marsupial  bones."  The  name  is  a  misnomer, 
originally  conferred  because  it  was  thought  that 
these  bones  have  something  to  do  with  the  support 
of  the  pouch,  or  marsupium,  with  which  some,  but 
not  all,  of  the  opossums  are  provided.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  they  have  nothing  to  do  with  the 
support  of  the  pouch,  and  they  exist  as  much  in 
those  opossums  which  have  no  pouches  as  in  those 
which  possess  them.  In  truth,  no  one  knows  what 
the  use  of  these  bones  may  be,  nor  has  any  valid 
theory  of  their  physiological  import  yet  been 
suggested.  And  if  we  have  no  knowledge  of  the 
physiological  importance  of  the  bones  themselves, 
it  is  obviously  absurd  to  pretend  that  we  are  able 
to  give  physiological  reasous  why  the  presence  of 
these  bones  is  associated  witK  certain  peculiarities 
of  the  teeth  and  of  the  jaws.  If  any  one  knows 
why  four  molar  teeth  and  an  inflected  angle  of  the 
jaw  are  very  generally  found  along  with  marsupial 
bones,  he  has  not  yet  communicated  that  know- 
ledge to  thy  world. 


20  ON  THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIQ  l 

If,  however,  Zadig  was  right  in  concluding  from 
the  likeness  of  the  hoof-prints  which  he  observed 
to  a  horse's  that  the  creature  w^hich  made  them 
had  a  tail  like  that  of  a  horse,  Cuvier,  seeing  that 
the  teeth  and  jaw  of  his  fossil  were  just  like  those 
of  an  opossum,  had  the  same  right  to  conclude 
that  the  pelvis  would  also  be  like  an  opossum's ; 
and  so  strong  was  his  conviction  that  this  retro- 
spective prophecy,  about  an  animal  which  he  had 
never  seen  before,  and  which  had  been  dead  and 
buried  for  millions  of  years,  would  be  verified,  that 
he  went  to  work  upon  the  slab  which  contained 
the  pelvis  in  confident  expectation  of  finding  and 
laying  bare  the  "  marsupial  bones,"  to  the  satis- 
faction of  some  persons  whom  he  had  invited  to 
witness  their  disinterment.  As  he  says  : — "  Cette 
operation  se  fit  en  presence  de  quelques  personnes 
k  qui  j'en  avals  annonce  d'avance  le  resultat, 
dans  I'intention  de  leur  prouver  par  le  fait  la 
justice  de  nos  theories  zoologiques;  puisque  le 
vrai  cachet  d'une  theorie  est  sans  contredit  la 
faculte  qu'elle  donne  de  prevoir  les  phenomenes." 

In  the  "  Ossemens  Fossiles  "  Cuvier  leaves  his 
paper  just  as  it  first  appeared  in  the  "  Annales 
du  Museum,"  as  "a  curious  monument  of  the 
force  of  zoological  laws  and  of  the  use  which  may 
be  made  of  them." 

Zoological  laws  truly,  but  not  physiological  laws. 
If  one  sees  a  live  dog's  head,  it  is  extremely  prob- 
able that  a  dog's  tail  is  not  far  off,  though  nobody 


1  ON  THE  METHOD   OF  ZADIG  21 

can  say  why  that  sort  of  head  and  that  sort  of  tail 
go  together ;  what  physiological  connection  there 
is  between  the  two.  So,  in  the  case  of  the 
Montmartre  fossil,  Cuvier,  finding  a  thorough 
opossum's  head,  concluded  that  the  pelvis  also 
would  be  like  an  opossum's.  But,  most  assuredly, 
the  most  advanced  physiologist  of  the  present  day 
could  throw  no  light  on  the  question  why  these 
are  associated,  nor  could  pretend  to  affirm  that  the 
existence  of  the  one  is  necessarily  connected  with 
that  of  the  other.  In  fact,  had  it  so  happened 
that  the  pelvis  of  the  fossil  had  been  originally 
exposed,  while  the  head  lay  hidden,  the  presence 
of  the  "  marsupial  bones,"  though  very  like 
an  opossum's,  would  by  no  means  have  war- 
ranted the  prediction  that  the  skull  would  turn 
out  to  be  that  of  the  opossum.  It  might 
just  as  well  have  been  like  that  of  some  other 
marsupial ;  or  even  like  that  of  the  totally  dif- 
ferent group  of  Monotremes,  of  which  the  only 
living  representatives  are  the  Echidna  and  the 
Omithorhynchus. 

For  all  practical  purposes,  however,  the  emiDirical 
laws  of  co-ordination  of  structures,  which  are 
embodied  in  the  generalisations  of  morphology, 
may  be  confidently  trusted,  if  employed  with  due 
caution,  to  lead  to  a  just  interpretation  of  fossil 
remains ;  or,  in  other  words,  we  may  look  for  the 
verification  of  the  retrospective  prophecies  which 
are  based  upon  them. 


22  ON  THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIG  i 

And  if  this  be  the  case,  the  late  advances  which 
have  been  made  in  palseontological  discovery  open 
out  a  new  field  for  such  prophecies.  For  it  has 
been  ascertained  with  respect  to  many  groups  of 
animals,  that,  as  we  trace  them  back  in  time, 
their  ancestors  gradually  cease  to  exhibit  those 
special  modifications  which  at  present  characterise 
the  type,  and  more  nearly  embody  the  general  plan 
of  the  group  to  which  they  belong. 

Thus,  in  the  well-known  case  of  the  horse,  the 
toes  which  are  suppressed  in  the  living  horse  are 
found  to  be  more  and  more  complete  in  the  older 
members  of  the  group,  until,  at  the  bottom  of  the 
Tertiary  series  of  America,  we  find  an  equine 
animal  which  has  four  toes  in  front  and  three 
behind.  No  remains  of  the  horse  tribe  are  at 
present  known  from  any  Mesozoic  deposit.  Yet 
who  can  doubt  that,  whenever  a  sufficiently  exten- 
sive series  of  lacustrine  and  fluviatile  beds  of  that 
age  becomes  known,  the  lineage  which  has  been 
traced  thus  far  will  be  continued  by  equine  quad- 
rupeds with  an  increasing  number  of  digits,  until 
the  horse  type  merges  in  the  five-toed  form 
towards  which  these  gradations  point  ? 

But  the  argument  which  holds  good  for  the 
horse,  holds  good,  not  only  for  all  mammals,  but 
for  the  whole  animal  world.  And  as  the  study  of 
the  pedigrees,  or  lines  of  evolution,  to  which,  at 
present,  we  have  access,  brings  to  light,  as  it 
assuredly  will  do,  the  laws  of  that  process,  we 


I  ON  THE  METHOD  OF  ZADIG  23 

shall  be  able  to  reason  from  the  facts  with  which 
the  geological  record  furnishes  us  to  those  which 
have  hitherto  remained,  and  many  of  which, 
perhaps,  may  for  ever  remain,  hidden.  The  same 
method  of  reasoning  which  enables  us,  when 
furnished  with  a  fragment  of  an  extinct  animal,  to 
prophesy  the  character  which  the  whole  organism 
exhibited,  will,  sooner  or  later,  enable  us,  when 
we  know  a  few  of  the  later  terms  of  a  genea- 
logical series,  to  predict  the  nature  of  the  earlier 
terms. 

In  no  very  distant  future,  the  method  of  Zadig, 
applied  to  a  greater  body  of  facts  than  the  present 
generation  is  fortunate  enough  to  handle,  will 
enable  the  biologist  to  reconstruct  the  scheme  of 
life  from  its  beginning,  and  to  speak  as  confidently 
of  the  character  of  long  extinct  living  beings,  no 
trace  of  which  has  been  preserved,  as  Zadig  did  of 
the  queen's  spaniel  and  the  king's  horse.  Let  us 
hope  that  they  may  be  better  rewarded  for  their 
toil  and  their  sagacity  than  was  the  Babylonian 
philosopher ;  for  perhaps,  by  that  time,  the  magi 
also  may  be  reckoned  among  the  members  of  a 
forgotten  Fauna,  extinguished  in  the  struggle  for 
existence  against  their  great  rival,  common  sense. 


n 

THE  RISE  AND  PROGRESS  OF 
PALEONTOLOGY 

[1881] 

That  application  of  the  sciences  of  biology  and 
geology,  which  is  commonly  known  as  palaeon- 
tology, took  its  origin  in  the  mind  of  the  first 
person  who,  finding  something  like  a  shell,  or  a 
bone,  naturally  imbedded  in  gravel  or  rock,  in- 
dulged in  speculations  upon  the  nature  of  this 
thino^  which  he  had  du^  out — this  "  fossil " — and 
upon  the  causes  which  had  brought  it  into  such  a 
position.  In  this  rudimentary  form,  a  high  anti- 
quity may  safely  be  ascribed  to  palaeontology, 
inasmuch  as  we  know  that,  500  years  before  the 
Christian  era,  the  philosophic  doctrines  of  Xeno- 
phanes  were  influenced  by  his  observations  upon 
the  fossil  remains  exposed  in  the  quarries  of 
Syracuse.  From  this  time  forth  not  only  the 
philosophers,  but  the  poets,  the  historians,  the 
geographers  of  antiquity  occasionally  refer  to 
fossils ;  and,  after  the  revival  of  learning,  lively 
controversies   arose  respecting  their  real  nature. 


II  PROGRESS   OF  PALEONTOLOGY  25 

But  hardly  more  than  two  centuries  have  elapsed 
since  this  fundamental  problem  was  first  exhaust- 
ively treated  ;  it  was  only  in  the  last  century 
that  the  archaeological  value  of  fossils — their  im- 
portance, I  mean,  as  records  of  the  history  of  the 
earth — was  fully  recognised ;  the  first  adequate 
investigation  of  the  fossil  remains  of  any  large 
group  of  vertebrated  animals  is  to  be  found  in 
Cuvier's  "  Eecherches  sur  les  Ossemens  Fossiles," 
completed  in  1822;  and,  so  modern  is  strati- 
graphical  palaeontology,  that  its  founder,  William 
Smith,  lived  to  receive  the  just  recognition  of  his 
services  by  the  award  of  the  first  Wollaston  Medal 
in  1831. 

But,  although  palaeontology  is  a  comparatively 
youthful  scientific  speciality,  the  mass  of  materials 
with  which  it  has  to  deal  is  already  prodigious. 
In  the  last  fifty  years  the  number  of  known  fossil 
remains  of  in  vertebrated  animals  has  been  trebled 
or  quadrupled.  The  work  of  interpretation  of 
vertebrate  fossils,  the  foundations  of  which  were 
so  solidly  laid  by  Cuvier,  was  carried  on,  with 
wonderful  vigour  and  success,  by  Agassiz  in 
Switzerland,  by  Von  Meyer  in  Germany,  and  last, 
but  not  least,  by  Owen  in  this  country,  while,  in 
later  years,  a  multitude  of  workers  have  laboured 
in  the  same  field.  In  many  groups  of  the  animal 
kingdom  the  number  of  fossil  forms  already 
known  is  as  great  as  that  of  the  existing  species. 
In  some  cases  it  is  much  greater  ;  and  there  are 


26  PROGRESS  OF  PALEONTOLOGY  n 

entire  orders  of  animals  of  the  existence  of  which 
we  should  know  nothing  except  for  the  evidence 
afforded  by  fossil  remains.  With  all  this  it  may- 
be safely  assumed  that,  at  the  present  moment, 
we  are  not  acquainted  with  a  tithe  of  the  fossils 
which  will  sooner  or  later  be  discovered.  If  we 
may  judge  by  the  profusion  yielded  within  the 
last  few  years  by  the  Tertiary  formations  of  North 
America,  there  seems  to  be  no  limit  to  the  multi- 
tude of  mammalian  remains  to  be  expected  from 
that  continent ;  and  analogy  leads  us  to  expect 
similar  riches  in  Eastern  Asia,  whenever  the 
Tertiary  formations  of  that  region  are  as  carefully 
explored.  Again,  we  have,  as  yet,  almost  every- 
thing to  learn  respecting  the  terrestrial  population 
of  the  Mesozoic  epoch ;  and  it  seems  as  if  the 
Western  territories  of  the  United  States  were 
about  to  prove  as  instructive  in  regard  to  this 
point  as  they  have  in  respect  of  tertiary  life.  My 
friend  Professor  Marsh  informs  me  that,  within 
two  years,  remains  of  more  than  160  distinct  in- 
dividuals of  mammals,  belonging  to  twenty  species 
and  nine  genera,  have  been  found  in  a  space  not 
larger  than  the  floor  of  a  good-sized  room  ;  while 
beds  of  the  same  age  have  yielded  300  reptiles, 
varying  in  size  from  a  length  of  60  feet  or  80  feet 
to  the  dimensions  of  a  rabbit. 

The  task  which  I  have  set  myself  to-night  is  to 
endeavour  to  lay  before  you,  as  briefly  as  possible, 
a  sketch  of  the  successive  steps  by  which   our 


n 


PROGRESS   OF   PALEONTOLOGY  27 


present  knowledge  of  the  facts  of  palaeontology 
and  of  those  conclusions  from  them  which  are  in- 
disputable, has  been  attained ;  and  I  beg  leave  to 
remind  you,  at  the  outset,  that  in  attempting  to 
sketch  the  progress  of  a  branch  of  knowledge  to 
which  innumerable  labours  have  contributed,  my 
business  is  rather  with  generalisations  than  with 
details.  It  is  my  object  to  mark  the  epochs  of 
palaeontology,  not  to  recount  all  the  events  of  its 
history. 

That  which  I  just  now  called  the  fundamental 
problem  of  palaeontology,  the  question  which  has 
to  be  settled  before  any  other  can  be  profitably 
discussed,  is  this.  What  is  the  nature  of  fossils  ? 
Are  they,  as  the  healthy  common  sense  of  the 
ancient  Greeks  appears  to  have  led  them  to 
assume  without  hesitation,  the  remains  of  animals 
and  plants?  Or  are  they,  as  was  so  generally 
maintained  in  the  fifteenth,  sixteenth,  and  seven- 
teenth centuries,  mere  figured  stones,  portions  of 
mineral  matter  which  have  assumed  the  forms  of 
leaves  and  shells  and  bones,  just  as  those  portions 
of  mineral  matter  which  we  call  crystals  take  on 
the  form  of  regular  geometrical  solids  ?  Or,  again, 
are  they,  as  others  thought,  the  products  of  the 
germs  of  animals  and  of  the  seeds  of  plants  which 
have  lost  their  way,  as  it  were,  in  the  bowels 
of  the  earth,  and  have  achieved  only  an  imperfect 
and  abortive  development  ?  It  is  easy  to  sneer  at 
cur  ancestors  for  being  disposed  to  reject  the  first 


28  PROGRESS  OF  PALEONTOLOGY  ii 

in  favour  of  one  or  other  of  the  last  two  hypo- 
theses ;  but  it  is  much  more  profitable  to  try  to 
discover  why  they,  who  were  really  not  one  whit 
less  sensible  persons  than  our  excellent  selves, 
should  have  been  led  to  entertain  views  which 
strike  us  as  absurd.  The  belief  in  what  is  erro- 
neously called  spontaneous  generation,  that  is  to 
say,  in  the  development  of  living  matter  out  of 
mineral  matter,  apart  from  the  agency  of  pre- 
existing living  matter,  as  an  ordinary  occurrence 
at  the  present  day — which  is  still  held  by  some  of 
us,  was  universally  accepted  as  an  obvious  truth 
by  them.  They  could  point  to  the  arborescent 
forms  assumed  by  hoarfrost  and  by  sundry 
metallic  minerals  as  evidence  of  the  existence  in 
nature  of  a  "  plastic  force  "  competent  to  enable 
inorganic  matter  to  assume  the  form  of  organised 
bodies.  Then,  as  every  one  who  is  familiar  with 
fossils  knows,  they  present  innumerable  grada- 
tions, from  shells  and  bones  which  exactly  re- 
semble the  recent  objects,  to  masses  of  mere  stone 
which,  however  accurately  they  repeat  the  out- 
ward form  of  the  organic  body,  have  nothing  else 
in  common  with  it;  and,  thence,  to  mere  traces 
and  faint  impressions  in  the  continuous  substance 
of  the  rock.  What  we  now  know  to  be  the  re- 
sults of  the  chemical  changes  which  take  place  in 
the  course  of  fossilisation,  by  which  mineral  is 
substituted  for  organic  substance,  might,  in  the 
absence  of  such  knowledge,  be  fairly  interpreted 


n  PROGRESS   OF  PALiEONTOLOGY  29 

as  the  expression  of  a  process  of  development  in 
the  opposite  direction — from  the  mineral  to  the 
organic.  Moreover,  in  an  age  when  it  would  have 
seemed  the  most  absurd  of  paradoxes  to  suggest 
that  the  general  level  of  the  sea  is  constant,  while 
that  of  the  solid  land  fluctuates  up  and  down 
through  thousands  of  feet  in  a  secular  ground 
swell,  it  may  well  have  appeared  far  less  hazardous 
to  conceive  that  fossils  are  sports  of  nature  than 
to  accept  the  necessary  alternative,  that  all  the 
inland  regions  and  highlands,  in  the  rocks  of 
which  marine  shells  had  been  found,  had  once 
been  covered  by  the  ocean.  It  is  not  so  surpris- 
ing, therefore,  as  it  may  at  first  seem,  that 
although  such  men  as  Leonardo  da  Vinci  and 
Bernard  Palissy  took  just  vicAVS  of  the  nature  of 
fossils,  the  opinion  of  the  majority  of  their  con- 
temporaries set  strongly  the  other  way ;  nor  even 
that  error  maintained  itself  long  after  the  scientific 
grounds  of  the  true  interpretation  of  fossils  had 
been  stated,  in  a  manner  that  left  nothing  to  be 
desired,  in  the  latter  half  of  the  seventeenth 
century.  The  person  who  rendered  this  good 
service  to  palaeontology  was  Nicolas  Steno,  pro- 
fessor of  anatomy  in  Florence,  though  a  Dane  by 
birth.  Collectors  of  fossils  at  that  day  were 
familiar  with  certain  bodies  termed  "  glossopetrse," 
and  speculation  was  rife  as  to  their  nature.  In 
the  first  half  of  the  seventeenth  century,  Fabio 
Colonna  had  tried  to  convince  his  colleagues  of 


so  PROGRESS   OF  PALEONTOLOGY  n 

the  famous  Accademia  dei  Lincei  that  the  glosso- 
petrse  were  merely  fossil  sharks'  teeth,  but  his 
arguments  made  no  impression.  Fifty  years  later, 
Steno  re-opened  the  question,  and,  by  dissecting 
the  head  of  a  shark  and  pointing  out  the  very 
exact  correspondence  of  its  teeth  with  the  glosso- 
petra3,  left  no  rational  doubt  as  to  the  origin  of 
the  latter.  Thus  far,  the  work  of  Steno  went 
little  further  than  that  of  Colonna,  but  it  for- 
tunately occurred  to  him  to  think  out  the  whole 
subject  of  the  interpretation  of  fossils,  and  the 
result  of  his  meditations  was  the  publication, 
in  1669,  of  a  little  treatise  with  the  very  quaint 
title  of  "  De  Solido  intra  Solidum  naturaliter 
contento."  The  general  course  of  Steno's  argu- 
ment may  be  stated  in  a  few  words.  Fossils  are 
solid  bod  ies  which,  by  some  natural  process,  have 
come  to  be  contained  within  other  solid  bodies, 
namely,  the  rocks  in  which  they  are  embedded  ; 
and  the  fundamental  problem  of  palaeontology, 
stated  generally,  is  this  :  "  Given  a  body  endowed 
with  a  certain  shape  and  produced  in  accordance 
with  natural  laws,  to  find  in  that  body  itself  the 
evidence  of  the  place  and  manner  of  its  pro- 
duction." ^  The  only  way  of  solving  this  problem 
is  by  the  application  of  the  axiom  that  "  like 
effects  imply  like  causes,"  or  as  Steno  puts  it,  in 

^  De  Solido  intra  Solidum,  p.  5. — "Datocorpore  certa  figurjl 
prsedito  et  juxta  leges  naturse  prodiicto,  in  ipso  corpore 
argumenta  in  venire  locum  et  modum  productionis  detegentia." 


n  PROGRESS  OF  PALEONTOLOGY  81 

reference  to  this  particular  case,  that  '*  bodies 
which  are  altogether  similar  have  been  produced 
in  the  same  way."  ^  Hence,  since  the  glossopetrse 
are  altogether  similar  to  sharks'  teeth,  they  must 
have  been  produced  by  sharklike  fishes  ;  and 
since  many  fossil  shells  correspond,  down  to  the 
minutest  details  of  structure,  with  the  shells  of 
existing  marine  or  freshwater  animals,  they  must 
have  been  produced  by  similar  animals  ;  and  the 
like  reasoning  is  applied  by  Steno  to  the  fossil 
bones  of  vertebrated  animals,  whether  aquatic  or 
terrestrial.  To  the  obvious  objection  that  many 
fossils  are  not  altogether  similar  to  their  living 
analogues,  differing  in  substance  while  agreeing  in 
form,  or  being  mere  hollows  or  impressions,  the 
surfaces  of  which  are  figured  in  the  same  way  as 
those  of  animal  or  vegetable  organisms,  Steno 
replies  by  pointing  out  the  changes  which  take 
place  in  organic  remains  embedded  in  the  earth, 
and  how  their  solid  substance  may  be  dissolved 
away  entirely,  or  replaced  by  mineral  matter, 
until  nothing  is  left  of  the  original  but  a  cast,  an 
impression,  or  a  mere  trace  of  its  contours.  The 
principles  of  investigation  thus  excellently  stated 
and  illustrated  by  Steno  in  1669,  are  those  which 
have,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  guided  the 
researches  of  palaeontologists  ever  since.  Even 
that  feat  of  palaeontology  which  has  so  powerfully 

^  "Corpora  sibi  invicem  omnino  similia  simili  etiam  modo 
producta  sunt  " 


32  PROGRESS  OF  PALEONTOLOGY  ii 

impressed  the  popular  imagination,  the  recon- 
struction of  an  extinct  animal  from  a  tooth  or  a 
bone,  is  based  upon  the  simplest  imaginable  appli- 
cation of  the  logic  of  Steno.  A  moment's  con- 
sideration will  show,  in  fact,  that  Steno's  conclu- 
sion that  the  glossopetrse  are  sharks'  teeth  implies 
the  reconstruction  of  an  animal  from  its  tooth.  It 
is  equivalent  to  the  assertion  that  the  animal  of 
which  the  glossopetrse  are  relics  had  the  form  and 
organisation  of  a  shark ;  that  it  had  a  skull,  a 
vertebral  column,  and  limbs  similar  to  those  which 
are  characteristic  of  this  group  of  fishes  ;  that  its 
heart,  gills,  and  intestines  presented  the  pecu- 
liarities which  those  of  all  sharks  exhibit ;  nay, 
even  that  any  hard  parts  which  its  integument 
contained  were  of  a  totally  different  character 
from  the  scales  of  ordinary  fishes.  These  conclu- 
sions are  as  certain  as  any  based  upon  probable 
reasonings  can  be.  And  they  are  so,  simply  be- 
cause a  very  large  experience  justifies  us  in 
believing  that  teeth  of  this  particular  form  and 
structure  are  invariably  associated  with  the  pecu- 
liar organisation  of  sharks,  and  are  never  found 
in  connection  with  other  organisms.  Why  this 
should  be  we  are  not  at  present  in  a  position  even 
to  imagine ;  we  must  take  the  fact  as  an  empirical 
law  of  animal  morphology,  the  reason  of  which 
may  possibly  be  one  day  found  in  the  history  of 
the  evolution  of  the  shark  tribe,  but  for  which  it 
is  hopeless  to  seek  for  an  explanation  in  ordinary 


n  PROGRESS   OF  PALEONTOLOGY  33 

physiological  reasonings.  Every  one  practically 
acquainted  with  palaeontology  is  aware  that  it  is 
not  every  tooth,  nor  every  bone,  which  enables  us 
to  form  a  judgment  of  the  character  of  the  animal 
to  which  it  belonged  ;  and  that  it  is  possible  to 
possess  many  teeth,  and  even  a  large  portion  of 
the  skeleton  of  an  extinct  animal,  and  yet  be 
unable  to  reconstruct  its  skull  or  its  limbs.  It 
is  only  when  the  tooth  or  bone  presents  peculi- 
arities, which  we  know  by  previous  experience  to 
be  characteristic  of  a  certain  group,  that  we  can 
safely  predict  that  the  fossil  belonged  to  an 
animal  of  the  same  group.  Any  one  who  finds  a 
cow's  grinder  may  be  perfectly  sure  that  it  be- 
longed to  an  animal  which  had  two  complete  toes 
on  each  foot  and  ruminated ;  any  one  who  finds  a 
horse's  grinder  may  be  as  sure  that  it  had  one 
complete  toe  on  each  foot  and  did  not  ruminate  ; 
but  if  ruminants  and  horses  were  extinct  animals 
of  which  nothing  but  the  grinders  had  ever  been 
discovered,  no  amount  of  physiological  reasoning 
could  have  enabled  us  to  reconstruct  either 
animal,  still  less  to  have  divined  the  wide  differ- 
ences between  the  two.  Cuvier,  in  the  "  Discours 
sur  les  Revolutions  de  la  Surface  du  Globe,'* 
strangely  credits  himself,  and  has  ever  since  been 
credited  by  others,  with  the  invention  of  a  new 
method  of  palaeontological  research.  But  if  you 
will  turn  to  the  "  Recherches  sur  les  Ossemens 
Fossiles  "  and  watch  Cuvier,  not  speculating,  but 

92 


34  PROGRESS   OF   PALEONTOLOGY  n 

working,  you  will  find  that  his  method  is  neither 
more  nor  less  than  that  of  Steno.  If  he  was  able 
to  make  his  famous  prophecy  from  the  jaw  which 
lay  upon  the  surface  of  a  block  of  stone  to  the 
pelvis  of  the  same  animal  which  lay  hidden  in  it, 
it  was  not  because  either  he,  or  any  one  else, 
knew,  or  knows,  why  a  certain  form  of  jaw  is,  as  a 
rule,  constantly  accompanied  by  the  presence  of 
marsupial  bones,  but  simply  because  experience 
has  shown  that  these  two  structures  are  co- 
ordinated. 

The  settlement  of  the  nature  of  fossils  led  at 
once  to  the  next  advance  of  palaeontology,  viz.  its 
application  to  the  deciphering  of  the  history  of 
the  earth.  When  it  was  admitted  that  fossils  are 
remains  of  animals  and  plants,  it  followed  that,  in 
so  far  as  they  resemble  terrestrial,  or  freshwater, 
animals  and  plants,  they  are  evidences  of  the 
existence  of  land,  or  fresh  water;  and,  in  so  far 
as  they  resemble  marine  organisms,  they  are 
evidences  of  the  existence  of  the  sea  at  the  time 
at  which  they  were  parts  of  actually  living  animals 
and  plants.  Moreover,  in  the  absence  of  evidence 
to  the  contrary,  it  must  be  admitted  that  the 
terrestrial  or  the  marine  organisms  implied  the 
existence  of  land  or  sea  at  the  place  in  which  they 
were  found  while  they  were  yet  living.  In  fact, 
such  conclusions  "V^^ere  immediately  drawn  by 
everybody,  from  the  time  of  Xenophanes  down- 
wards,   who    believed    that    fossils    were    really 


PROGRESS   OF  PALAEONTOLOGY  35 

Steno  discusses  their  value  as 
evidence  of  repeated  alteration  of  marine  and 
terrestrial  conditions  upon  the  soil  of  Tuscany  in 
a  manner  worthy  of  a  modern  geologist.  The 
speculations  of  De  Maillet  in  the  beginning  of 
the  eighteenth  century  turn  upon  fossils ;  and 
Buffon  follows  him  very  closely  in  those  two 
remarkable  works,  the  "  Theorie  de  la  Terre  "  and 
the  ''  Epoques  de  la  Nature  "  with  which  he  com- 
menced and  ended  his  career  as  a  naturalist. 

The  opening  sentences  of  the  "Epoques  de  la 
Nature  "  show  us  how  fully  Buffon  recognised  the 
analogy  of  geological  with  archaeological  inquiries. 
"As  in  civil  history  we  consult  deeds,  seek  for 
coins,  or  decipher  antique  inscriptions  in  order  to 
determine  the  epochs  of  human  revolutions  and 
fix  the  date  of  moral  events  ;  so,  in  natural  history, 
we  must  search  the  archives  of  the  world,  recover 
old  monuments  from  the  bowels  of  the  earth, 
collect  their  fragmentary  remains,  and  gather  into 
one  body  of  evidence  all  the  signs  of  physical 
change  which  may  enable  us  to  look  back  upon 
the  different  ages  of  nature.  It  is  our  only  means 
of  fixing  some  points  in  the  immensity  of  space, 
and  of  setting  a  certain  number  of  waymarks 
along  the  eternal  path  of  time." 

Buffon  enumerates  five  classes  of  these 
monuments  of  the  past  history  of  the  earth,  and 
they  are  all  facts  of  palaeontology.  In  the  first 
place,  he  says,  shells  and  other  marine  productions 


S6  PROGRESS  OF  PALiEONTOLOGT  n 

are  found  all  over  the  surface  and  in  the  interior 
of  the  dry  land  ;  and  all  calcareous  rocks  are  made 
up  of  their  remains.  Secondly,  a  great  many  of 
these  shells  which  are  found  in  Europe  are  not 
now  to  be  met  with  in  the  adjacent  seas ;  and,  in 
the  slates  and  other  deep-seated  deposits,  there 
are  remains  of  fishes  and  of  plants  of  which  no 
species  now  exist  in  our  latitudes,  and  which  are 
either  extinct,  or  exist  only  in  more  northern 
climates.  Thirdly,  in  Siberia  and  in  other 
northern  regions  of  Europe  and  of  Asia,  bones 
and  teeth  of  elephants,  rhinoceroses,  and  hippo- 
potamuses occur  in  such  numbers  that  these 
animals  must  once  have  lived  and  multiplied  in 
those  regions,  although  at  the  present  day  they 
are  confined  to  southern  climates.  The  deposits 
in  which  these  remains  are  found  are  superficial, 
while  those  which  contain  shells  and  other  marine 
remains  lie  much  deeper.  Fourthly,  tusks  and 
bones  of  elephants  and  hippopotamuses  are  found 
not  only  in  the  northern  regions  of  the  old  world, 
but  also  in  those  of  the  new  world,  although,  at 
present,  neither  elephants  nor  hippopotamuses 
occur  in  America.  Fifthly,  in  the  middle  of  the 
continents,  in  regions  most  remote  from  the  sea,  we 
find  an  infinite  number  of  shells,  of  which  the  most 
part  belong  to  animals  of  those  kinds  which  still 
exist  in  southern  seas,  but  of  which  many  others 
have  no  living  analogues;  so  that  these  species 
appear  to  be  lost,  destroyed  by   some   unknown 


n  PROGRESS   OF   PALAEONTOLOGY  37 

cause.  It  is  needless  to  inquire  how  far  these 
statements  are  strictly  accurate ;  they  are 
sufficiently  so  to  justify  Buffon's  conclusions  that 
the  dry  land  was  once  beneath  the  sea ;  that  the 
formation  of  the  fossiliferous  rocks  must  have 
occupied  a  vastly  greater  lapse  of  time  than  that 
traditionally  ascribed  to  the  age  of  the  earth; 
that  fossil  remains  indicate  different  climatal 
conditions  to  have  obtained  in  former  times,  and 
especially  that  the  polar  regions  were  once 
warmer ;  that  many  species  of  animals  and  plants 
have  become  extinct ;  and  that  geological  change 
has  had  something  to  do  with  geographical  dis- 
tribution. 

But  these  propositions  almost  constitute  the 
frame-work  of  palaeontology.  In  order  to  com- 
plete it  but  one  addition  was  needed,  and  that 
was  made,  in  the  last  years  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  by  William  Smith,  whose  work  comes  so 
near  our  own  times  that  many  living  men  may 
have  been  personally  acquainted  with  him.  This 
modest  land-surveyor,  whose  business  took  him 
into  many  parts  of  England,  profited  by  the 
peculiarly  favourable  conditions  offered  by  the 
arrangement  of  our  secondary  strata  to  make  a 
careful  examination  and  comparison  of  their 
fossil  contents  at  different  points  of  the  large  area 
over  which  they  extend.  The  result  of  his 
accurate  and  widely-extended  observations  was  to 
establish  the  important  truth  that  each  stratum 


38  PROGRESS   OF  PALEONTOLOGY  n 

contains  certain  fossils  which  are  peculiar  to  it; 
and  that  the  order  in  which  the  strata,  character- 
ised by  these  fossils,  are  super-imposed  one  upon 
the  other  is  always  the  same.  This  most  im- 
portant generalisation  was  rapidly  verified  and 
extended  to  all  parts  of  the  world  accessible  to 
geologists  ;  and  now  it  rests  upon  such  an  immense 
mass  of  observations  as  to  be  one  of  the  best 
established  truths  of  natural  science.  To  the 
geologist  the  discovery  was  of  infinite  importance 
as  it  enabled  him  to  identify  rocks  of  the  same 
relative  age,  however  their  continuity  might  be 
interrupted  or  their  composition  altered.  But  to 
the  biologist  it  had  a  still  deeper  meaning,  for  it 
demonstrated  that,  throughout  the  prodigious 
duration  of  time  registered  by  the  fossiliferous 
rocks,  the  living  population  of  the  earth  had 
undergone  continual  changes,  not  merely  by  the 
extinction  of  a  certain  number  of  the  species 
which  had  at  first  existed,  but  by  the  continual 
generation  of  new  species,  and  the  no  less  constant 
extinction  of  old  ones. 

Thus  the  broad  outlines  of'  palaeontology,  in  so 
far  as  it  is  the  common  property  of  both  the 
geologist  and  the  biologist,  were  marked  out  at 
the  close  of  the  last  century.  In  tracing  its  sub- 
sequent progress  I  must  confine  myself  to  the 
province  of  biology,  and,  indeed,  to  the  influence 
of  palaeontology  upon  zoological  morphology.  And 
I  accept  this  limitation  the  more  willingly  as  the 


II  PROGRESS  OF  PALEONTOLOGY  89 

no  less  important  topic  of  the  bearing  of  geology 
and  of  palaeontology  upon  distribution  has  been 
luminously  treated  in  the  address  of  the  President 
of  the  Geographical  Section.^ 

The  succession  of  the  species  of  animals  and 
plants  in  time  being  established,  the  first  question 
which  the  zoologist  or  the  botanist  had  to  ask  him- 
self was,  What  is  the  relation  of  these  successive 
species  one  to  another  ?  And  it  is  a  curious  cir- 
cumstance that  the  most  important  event  in  the 
history  of  palaeontology  which  immediately  suc- 
ceeded William  Smith's  generalisation  was  a  dis- 
covery which,  could  it  have  been  rightly  appreci- 
ated at  the  time,  would  have  gone  far  towards 
suggesting  the  answer,  which  was  in  fact  delayed 
for  more  than  half  a  century.  I  refer  to  Cuvier's 
investigation  of  the  mammalian  fossils  yielded  by 
the  quarries  in  the  older  tertiary  rocks  of  Mont- 
martre,  among  the  chief  results  of  which  was  the 
bringing  to  light  of  two  genera  of  extinct  hoofed 
quadrupeds,  the  Ano2^lotherucm  and  the  Palmo- 
therium.  The  rich  materials  at  Cuvier's  dis- 
position enabled  him  to  obtain  a  full  knowledge  of 
the  osteology  and  of  the  dentition  of  these  two 
forms,  and  consequently  to  compare  their  structure 
critically  with  that  of  existing  hoofed  animals. 
The  effect  of  this  comparison  was  to  prove  that 
the  AnoplotheriuDi,  though  it  presented  many 
points  of  resemblance  with  the  pigs  on  the  one 

1  Sir  J.  D.  Hooker. 


40  PROGRESS  OF  PALEONTOLOGY  n 

hand  and  with  the  ruminants  on  the  other,  differed 
from  both  to  such  an  extent  that  it  could  find  a 
place  in  neither  group.  In  fact,  it  held,  in  some 
respects,  an  intermediate  position,  tending  to 
bridge  over  the  interval  between  these  two  groups, 
which  in  the  existing  fauna  are  so  distinct.  In 
the  same  way,  the  Palmotherium  tended  to  connect 
forms  so  different  as  the  tapir,  the  rhinoceros,  and 
the  horse.  Subsequent  investigations  have  brought 
to  light  a  variety  of  facts  of  the  same  order,  the 
most  curious  and  striking  of  which  are  those  which 
prove  the  existence,  in  the  mesozoic  epoch,  of  a 
series  of  forms  intermediate  between  birds  and 
reptiles — two  classes  of  vertebrate  animals  which 
at  present  appear  to  be  more  widely  separated 
than  any  others.  Yet  the  interval  between  them 
is  completely  filled,  in  the  mesozoic  fauna,  by 
birds  which  have  reptilian  characters,  on  the  one 
side,  and  reptiles  which  have  ornithic  characters,  on 
the  other.  So  again,  while  the  group  of  fishes, 
termed  ganoids,  is,  at  the  present  time,  so  distinct 
from  that  of  the  dipnoi,  or  mudfishes,  that  they 
have  been  reckoned  as  distinct  orders,  the 
Devonian  strata  present  us  with  forms  of  which 
it  is  impossible  to  say  with  certainty  whether  they 
are  dipnoi  or  whether  they  are  ganoids. 

Agassiz's  long  and  elaborate  researches  upon 
fossil  fishes,  published  between  1833  and  1842, 
led  him  to  sus^o^est  the  existence  of  another  kind 
of  relation  between  ancient  and  modern  forms  of 


n  PROGRESS   OF  PALAEONTOLOGY  41 

life.  He  observed  that  the  oldest  fishes  present 
many  characters  which  recall  the  embryonic  con- 
ditions of  existing  fishes  ;  aod  that,  not  only  among 
fishes,  but  in  several  groups  of  the  invertebrata 
which  have  a  long  palseontological  history,  the 
latest  forms  are  more  modified,  more  specialised, 
than  the  earlier.  The  fact  that  the  dentition  of 
the  older  tertiary  ungulate  and  carnivorous  mam- 
mals is  always  complete,  noticed  by  Professor 
Owen,  illustrated  the  same  generalisation. 

Another  no  less  suggestive  observation  was  made 
by  Mr.  Darwin,  whose  personal  investigations 
during  the  voyage  of  the  Beagle  led  him  to  remark 
upon  the  singular  fact,  that  the  fauna,  which  im- 
mediately precedes  that  at  present  existing  in  any 
geographical  province  of  distribution,  presents  the 
same  peculiarities  as  its  successor.  Thus,  in 
South  America  and  in  Australia,  the  later  tertiary 
or  quaternary  fossils  show  that  the  fauna  which 
immediately  preceded  that  of  the  present  day 
was,  in  the  one  case,  as  much  characterised  by 
edentates  and,  in  the  other,  by  marsupials  as  it  is 
now,  although  the  species  of  the  older  are  largely 
different  from  those  of  the  newer  fauna. 

However  clearly  these  indications  might  point 
in  one  direction,  the  question  of  the  exact  relation 
of  the  successive  forms  of  animal  and  vegetable 
life  could  be  satisfactorily  settled  only  in  one  way  ; 
namely,  by  comparing,  stage  by  stage,  the  series  of 
forms  presented  by  one  and  the  same  type  through- 


42  PROGRESS  OF  PALiEONTOLOGY  ii 

out  a  long  space  of  time.  Within  the  last  few 
years  this  has  been  done  fully  in  the  case  of  the 
horse,  less  completely  in  the  case  of  the  other 
principal  types  of  the  ungulata  and  of  the  car- 
nivora;  and  all  these  investigations  tend  to  one 
general  result,  namely,  that,  in  any  given  series, 
the  successive  members  of  that  series  present  a 
gradually  increasing  specialisation  of  structure. 
That  is  to  say,  if  any  such  mammal  at  present 
existing  has  specially  modified  and  reduced  limbs 
or  dentition  and  complicated  brain,  its  predecessors 
in  time  show  less  and  less  modification  and  reduc- 
tion in  limbs  and  teeth  and  a  less  highly  developed 
brain.  The  labours  of  Gaudry,  Marsh,  and  Cope 
furnish  abundant  illustrations  of  this  law  from  the 
marvellous  fossil  wealth  of  Pikermi  and  the  vast 
uninterrupted  series  of  tertiary  rocks  in  the  terri- 
tories of  North  America. 

I  will  now  sum  up  the  results  of  this  sketch  of 
the  rise  and  progi*ess  of  palaeontology.  The  whole 
fabric  of  palaeontology  is  based  upon  two  proposi- 
tions :  the  first  is,  that  fossils  are  the  remains  of 
animals  and  plants  ;  and  the  second  is,  that  the 
stratified  rocks  in  which  they  are  found  are  sedi- 
mentary deposits ;  and  each  of  these  propositions, 
is  founded  upon  the  same  axiom,  that  like  effects 
imply  like  causes.  If  th6re  is  any  cause  competent 
to  produce  a  fossil  stem,  or  shell,  or  bone,  except 
a  living  being,  then  palaeontology  has  no  founda- 


n  PROGRESS   OF  PALEONTOLOGY  43 

tiou ;  if  the  stratification  of  the  rocks  is  not  the 
effect  of  such  causes  as  at  present  produce  stratifi- 
cation, we  have  no  means  of  judging  of  the  dura- 
tion of  past  time,  or  of  the  order  in  which  the 
forms  of  life  have  succeeded  one  another.  But  if 
these  two  propositions  are.  granted,  there  is  no 
escape,  as  it  appears  to  me,  from  three  very 
important  conckisions.  The  first  is  that  living 
matter  has  existed  upon  the  earth  for  a  vast  length 
of  time,  certainly  for  millions  of  years.  The 
second  is  that,  during  this  lapse  of  time,  the  forms 
of  living  matter  have  undergone  repeated  changes, 
the  effect  of  which  has  been  that  the  animal  and 
vegetable  population,  at  any  period  of  the  earth's 
history,  contains  certain  species  which  did  not  exist 
at  some  antecedent  period,  and  others  Avhich  ceased 
to  exist  at  some  subsequent  period.  The  third  is 
that,  in  the  case  of  many  groups  of  mammals 
and  some  of  reptiles,  in  which  one  type  can  be 
followed  through  a  considerable  extent  of  geological 
time,  the  series  of  different  forms  by  which  the  type 
is  represented,  at  successive  intervals  of  this  time, 
is  exactly  such  as  it  would  be,  if  they  had  been 
produced  by  the  gradual  modification  of  the 
earliest  forms  of  the  series.  These  are  facts  of  the 
history  of  the  earth  guaranteed  by  as  good  evidence 
as  any  facts  in  civil  history. 

Hitherto  I  have  kept  carefully  clear  of  all  the 
hypotheses  to  which  men  have  at  various  times 
endeavoured  to  fit  the  facts  of  palaeontology,  or  by 


44  PROGRESS   OF  PALEONTOLOGY  ii 

which  they  have  endeavoured  to  connect  as  many 
of  these  facts  as  they  happened  to  be  acquainted 
with.  I  do  not  think  it  would  be  a  profitable 
employment  of  our  time  to  discuss  conceptions 
which  doubtless  have  had  their  justification  and 
even  their  use,  but  which  are  now  obviously  incom- 
patible with  the  well-ascertained  truths  of  palae- 
ontology. At  present  these  truths  leave  room  for 
only  two  hypotheses.  The  first  is  that,  in  the  course 
of  the  history  of  the  earth,  innumerable  species  of 
animals  and  plants  have  come  into  existence,  in- 
dependently of  one  another,  innumerable  times. 
This,  of  course,  implies  either  that  spontaneous 
generation  on  the  most  astounding  scale,  and  of 
animals  such  as  horses  and  elephants,  has  been 
gomg  on,  as  a  natural  process,  through  all  the  time 
recorded  by  the  fossiliferous  rocks ;  or  it  necessitates 
the  belief  in  innumerable  acts  of  creation  repeated 
innumerable  times.  The  other  hypothesis  is,  that 
the  successive  species  of  animals  and  plants  have 
arisen,  the  later  by  the  gradual  modification  of  the 
earlier.  This  is  the  hypothesis  of  evolution ;  and 
the  palaeontological  discoveries  of  the  last  decade 
are  so  completely  in  accordance  with  the  require- 
ments of  this  hypothesis  that,  if  it  had  not  existed, 
the  palaeontologist  would  have  had  to  invent  it. 

I  have  always  had  a  certain  horror  of  presuming 
to  set  a  limit  upon  the  possibilities  of  things. 
Therefore  I  will  not  venture  to  say  that  it  is  im- 
possible that  the  multitudinous  species  of  animals 


n 


PROGRESS  OF  PALAEONTOLOGY  45 


and  plants  may  have  been  produced,  one  separately 
from  the  other,  by  spontaneous  generation ;  nor  that 
it  is  impossible  that  they  should  have  been  inde- 
pendently originated  by  an  endless  succession  of 
miraculous  creative  acts.  But  I  must  confess  that 
both  these  hypotheses  strike  me  as  so  astoundingly 
improbable,  so  devoid  of  a  shred  of  either  scientific 
or  traditional  support,  that  even  if  there  were  no 
other  evidence  than  that  of  palseontology  in  its 
favour,  I  should  feel  compelled  to  adopt  the 
hypothesis  of  evolution.  Happily,  the  future  of 
palaeontology  is  independent  of  all  hypothetical 
considerations.  Fifty  years  hence,  whoever  under- 
takes to  record  the  progress  of  palaeontology  will, 
note  the  present  time  as  the  epoch  in  which 
the  law  of  succession  of  the  forms  of  the  higher 
animals  was  determined  by  the  observation  of 
palseontological  facts.  He  will  point  out  that, 
just  as  Steno  and  as  Cuvier  were  enabled  from 
their  knowledge  of  the  empirical  laws  of  co-exist- 
ence of  the  parts  of  animals  to  conclude  from  a 
part  to  the  whole,  so  the  knowledge  of  the  law  of 
succession  of  forms  empowered  their  successors  to 
conclude,  from  one  or  two  terms  of  such  a  succes- 
sion, to  the  whole  series ;  and  thus  to  divine  the 
existence  of  forms  of  life,  of  which,  perhaps,  no 
trace  remains,  at  epochs  of  inconceivable  remote- 
ness in  the  past. 


Ill 

LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION 
[1876] 

I 

THE  THKEE   HYPOTHESES  EESPECTING  THE 
HISTORY   OF  NATURE 

We  live  in  and  form  part  of  a  system  of  things  of 
immense  diversity  and  perplexity,  which  we  call 
Nature ;  and  it  is  a  matter  of  the  deepest  interest 
to  all  of  us  that  we  should  form  just  conceptions 
of  the  constitution  of  that  system  and  of  its  past 
history.  With  relation  to  this  universe,  man  is, 
in  extent,  little  more  than  a  mathematical  point ; 
in  duration  hut  a  fleeting  shadow ;  he  is  a  mere 
reed  shaken  in  the  winds  of  force.  But  as  Pascal 
long  ago  remarked,  although  a  mere  reed,  he  is  a 
thinking  reed ;  and  in  virtue  of  that  wonderful 
capacity  of  thought,  he  has  the  power  of  framing 
for  himself  a  symbolic  conception  of  the  universe, 


ra  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  47 

which,  although  doubtless  highly  imperfect  and 
inadequate  as  a  picture  of  the  great  whole,  is  yet 
sufficient  to  serve  him  as  a  chart  for  the  guidance 
of  his  practical  affairs.  It  has  taken  long  ages  of 
toilsome  and  often  fruitless  labour  to  enable  man 
to  look  steadily  at  the  shifting  scenes  of  tlie  phan- 
tasmagoria of  Nature,  to  notice  what  is  fixed 
among  her  fluctuations,  and  what  is  regular  among 
her  apparent  irregularities  ;  and  it  is  only  compara- 
tively lately,  within  the  last  few  centuries,  that 
the  conception  of  a  universal  order  and  of  a  definite 
course  of  things,  which  we  term  the  course  of 
Nature,  has  emerged. 

But,  once  originated,  the  conception  of  the  con- 
stancy of  the  order  of  Nature  has  become  the 
dominant  idea  of  modern  thought.  To  any  person 
who  is  familiar  with  the  facts  upon  which  that 
conception  is  based,  and  is  competent  to  estimate 
their  significance,  it  has  ceased  to  be  conceivable 
that  chance  should  have  any  place  in  the  universe, 
or  that  events  should  depend  upon  any  but  the 
natural  sequence  of  cause  and  effect.  We  have 
come  to  look  ujDon  the  present  as  the  child  of  the 
past  and  as  the  parent  of  the  future  ;  and,  as  we 
have  excluded  chance  from  a  place  in  the  universe, 
so  we  ignore,  even  as  a  possibility,  the  notion  of 
any  interference  with  the  order  of  Nature.  What- 
ever may  be  men's  speculative  doctrines,  it  is  quite 
certain  that  every  intelligent  person  guides  his  life 
and  risks  his  fortune  upon  the  belief  that  the  order 


48  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  III 

of  Nature  is  constant,  and  that  the  chain  of  natural 
causation  is  never  broken. 

In  fact,  no  belief  which  we  entertain  has  so  com- 
plete a  logical  basis  as  that  to  which  I  have  just 
referred.  It  tacitly  underlies  every  process  of 
reasoning ;  it  is  the  foundation  of  every  act  of  the 
will.  It  is  based  upon  the  broadest  induction, 
and  it  is  verified  by  the  most  constant,  regular, 
and  universal  of  deductive  processes.  But  we 
must  recollect  that  any  human  belief,  however 
broad  its  basis,  however  defensible  it  may  seem,  is, 
after  all,  only  a  probable  belief,  and  that  our 
widest  and  safest.generalisations  are  simply  state- 
ments of  the  highest  degree  of  probability. 
Though  we  are  quite  clear  about  the  constancy  of 
the  order  of  Nature,  at  the  present  time,  and  in 
the  present  state  of  things,  it  by  no  means 
necessarily  follows  that  we  are  justified  in  expanding 
this  generalisation  into  the  infinite  past,  and  in 
denying,  absolutely,  that  there  may  have  been  a 
time  when  Nature  did  not  follow  a  fixed  order, 
when  the  relations  of  cause  and  effect  were  not 
definite,  and  when  extra-natural  agencies  interfered 
with  the  general  course  of  Nature.  Cautious  men 
will  allow  that  a  universe  so  different  from  that 
which  we  know  may  have  existed  ;  just  as  a  very 
candid  thinker  may  admit  that  a  world  in  which 
two  and  two  do  not  make  four,  and  in  which  two 
straight  lines  do  inclose  a  space,  may  exist.  But 
the  same  caution  which  forces  the  admission  of 


tiT  LECTURES   ON   EVOI^UTION  49 

sucli  possibilities  demands  a  great  deal  of  evidence 
before  it  recognises  them  to  be  anything  more 
substantial.  And  when  it  is  asserted  that,  so 
many  thousand  years  ago,  events  occurred  in  a 
manner  utterly  foreign  to  and  inconsistent  with 
the  existing  laws  of  Nature,  men,  who  without 
being  particularly  cautious,  are  simply  honest 
thinkers,  unwilling  to  deceive  themselves  or  de- 
lude others,  ask  for  trustworthy  evidence  of  the 
fact. 

Did  things  so  happen  or  did  they  not  ?  This 
is  a  historical  question,  and  one  the  answer  to 
which  must  be  sought  in  the  same  way  as  the 
solution  of  any  other  historical  problem. 

So  far  as  I  knov/,  there  are  only  three  hypotheses 
which  ever  have  been  entertained,  or  which  well 
can  be  entertained,  respecting  the  past  history  of 
Nature.  I  will,  in  the  first  place,  state  the  hypo- 
theses, and  then  I  will  consider  what  evidence 
bearing  upon  them  is  in  our  possession,  and  by 
what  light  of  criticism  that  evidence  is  to  be  in- 
terpreted. 

Upon  the  first  hypothesis,  the  assumption  is, 
that  phenomena  of  Nature  similar  to  those  ex- 
hibited by  the  present  world  have  always  existed ; 
in  other  words,  that  the  universe  has  existed,  from 
all  eternity,  in  what  may  be  broadly  termed  its 
present  condition. 

The  second  hypothesis  is  that  the  present  state 
93  \ 


50  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  m 

of  things  has  had  only  a  limited  duration  ;  and 
that,  at  some  period  in  the  past,  a  condition  of 
the  world,  essentially  similar  to  that  which  we  now 
know,  came  into  existence,  without  any  precedent 
condition  from  which  it  could  have  naturally  pro- 
ceeded. The  assumption  that  successive  states  of 
Nature  have  arisen,  each  without  any  relation  of 
natural  causation  to  an  antecedent  state,  is  a 
mere  modification  of  this  second  hypothesis. 

The  third  hypothesis  also  assumes  that  the  pres- 
ent state  of  things  has  had  but  a  limited  dura- 
tion ;  but  it  supposes  that  this  state  has  been 
evolved  by  a  natural  process  from  an  antecedent 
state,  and  that  from  another,  and  so  on ;  and,  on 
this  hypothesis,  the  attempt  to  assign  any  limit  to 
the  series  of  past  changes  is,  usually,  given  up. 

It  is  so  needful  to  form  clear  and  distinct  notions 
of  what  is  really  meant  by  each  of  these  hypotheses 
that  I  will  ask  you  to  imagine  what,  according  to 
each,  would  have  been  visible  to  a  spectator  of 
the  events  which  constitute  the  history  of  the 
earth.  On  the  first  hypothesis,  however  far  back 
in  time  that  spectator  might  be  placed,  he  would 
see  a  world  essentially,  though  perhaps  not  in  all 
its  details,  similar  to  that  which  now  exists.  The 
animals  which  existed  would  be  the  ancestors  of 
those  which  now  live,  and  similar  to  them ;  the 
plants,  in  like  manner,  would  be  such  as  we  know; 
and  the  mountains,  plains,  and  waters  would  fore- 
shadow the  salient  features   of  our  present  land 


m  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  51 

and  water.  This  view  was  held  more  or  less 
distinctly,  sometimes  combined  with  the  notion  of 
recurrent  cycles  of  change,  in  ancient  times  ;  and 
its  influence  has  been  felt  down  to  the  present  day. 
It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  it  is  a  hypothesis 
which  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  doctrine  of 
Uniformitarianism,  with  which  geologists  are 
familiar.  That  doctrine  was  held  by  Hutton,  and 
in  his  earlier  days  by  Lyell.  Hutton  was  struck 
by  the  demonstration  of  astronomers  that  the  per- 
turbations of  the  planetary  bodies,  however  great 
they  may  be,  yet  sooner  or  later  right  themselves; 
and  that  the  solar  system  possesses  a  self-adjusting 
power  by  which  these  aberrations  are  all  brought 
back  to  a  mean  condition.  Hutton  imagined  that 
the  like  might  be  true  of  terrestrial  changes; 
although  no  one  recognised  more  clearly  than  he 
the  fact  that  the  dry  land  is  being  constantly 
washed  down  by  rain  and  rivers  and  deposited  in 
the  sea ;  and  that  thus,  in  a  longer  or  shorter  time, 
the  inequalities  of  the  earth's  surface  must  be 
levelled,  and  its  high  lands  brought  down  to  the 
ocean.  But,  taking  into  account  the  internal 
forces  of  the  earth,  which,  upheaving  the  sea-bot- 
tom give  rise  to  new  land,  he  thought  that  these 
operations  of  degradation  and  elevation  might  com- 
pensate each  other  ;  and  that  thus,  for  any  assign- 
able time,  the  general  features  of  our  planet  might 
remain  what  they  are.  And  inasmuch  as,  under 
these  circumstances,  there  need  be  no  limit  to  the 


52  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  m 

propagation  of  animals  and  plants,  it  is  clear  that 
the  consistent  working-out  of  the  uniformitarian 
idea  might  lead  to  the  conception  of  the  eternity 
of  the  world.  Not  that  I  mean  to  say  that  either 
Hutton  or  Lyell  held  this  conception — assuredly 
not ;  they  would  have  been  the  first  to  repudiate 
it.  Nevertheless,  the  logical  development  of 
some  of  their  arguments  tends  directly  towards 
this  hypothesis. 

The  second  hypothesis  supposes  that  the  present 
order  of  things,  at  some  no  very  remote  time,  had 
a  sudden  origin,  and  that  the  world,  such  as  it 
now  is,  had  chaos  for  its  phenomenal  antecedent. 
That  is  the  doctrine  which  you  will  find  stated 
most  fully  and  clearly  in  the  immortal  poem  of 
John  Milton — the  English  Divina  Commedia — 
"  Paradise  Lost."  I  believe  it  is  largely  to  the 
influence  of  that  remarkable  work,  combined  with 
the  daily  teachings  to  which  we  have  all  listened 
in  our  childhood,  that  this  hypothesis  owes  its 
general  wide  diffusion  as  one  of  the  current  beliefs 
of  English-speaking  people.  If  you  turn  to  the 
seventh  book  of  "  Paradise  Lost,"  you  will  find  there 
stated  the  hypothesis  to  which  I  refer,  which  is 
briefly  this  :  That  this  visible  universe  of  ours 
came  into  existence  at  no  great  distance  of  time 
from  the  present ;  and  that  the  parts  of  which  it  is 
composed  made  their  appearance,  in  a  certain 
definite  order,  in  the  space  of  six  natural  days,  iu 
such  a  manner  that,  on  the  first  of  these  days. 


m  LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION  63 

light  appeared ;  that,  on  the  second,  the  firma- 
ment, or  sky,  separated  the  waters  above,  from 
the  waters  beneath  the  firmament;  that,  on  the 
third  day,  the  waters  drew  away  from  the  dry 
land,  and  upon  it  a  varied  vegetable  life, 
similar  to  that  which  now  exists,  made  its  appear- 
ance ;  that  the  fourth  day  was  signalised  by  the 
apparition  of  the  sun,  the  stars,  the  moon,  and 
the  planets  ;  that,  on  the  fifth  day,  aquatic  animals 
originated  within  the  waters ;  that,  on  the  sixth 
day,  the  earth  gave  rise  to  our  four-footed  terres- 
trial creatures,  and  to  all  varieties  of  terrestrial 
animals  except  birds,  which  had  appeared  on  the 
preceding  day ;  and,  finally,  that  man  appeared 
upon  the  earth,  and  the  emergence  of  the  universe 
from  chaos  was  finished.  Milton  tells  us,  without 
the  least  ambiguity,  what  a  spectator  of  these 
marvellous  occurrences  would  have  witnessed.  I 
doubt  not  that  his  poem  is  familiar  to  all  of  you, 
but  I  should  like  to  recall  one  passage  to  your 
minds,  in  order  that  I  may  be  justified  in  what  I 
have  said  regarding  the  perfectly  concrete,  definite, 
picture  of  the  origin  of  the  animal  world  which 
Milton  draws.     He  says  : — 

'•'  The  sixth,  and  of  creation  last,  arose 

"With  evening  harps  and  matin,  when  God  said, 
*  Let  the  earth  bring  forth  soul  living  in  her  kind, 
Cattle  and  creeping  things,  and  beast  of  the  earth, 
Each  in  their  kind  ! '     The  earth  obeyed,  and,  straight 
Opening  her  fertile  womb,  teemed  at  a  birth 
Innumerous  living  creatures,  perfect  forms. 


54  LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION"  in 

Limbed  and  full-grown.     Out  of  the  ground  uprose, 

As  from  his  lair,  the  wild  heast,  Avhere  he  wons 

In  forest  wild,  in  thicket,  brake,  or  den  ; 

Among  the  trees  in  pairs  they  rose,  they  walked  ; 

The  cattle  in  the  fields  and  meadows  green  ; 

Those  rare  and  solitary ;  these  in  flocks 

Pasturing  at  once,  and  in  broad  herds  upsprung. 

The  grassy  clods  now  calved  ;  now  half  appears 

The  tawny  lion,  pawing  to  get  free 

His  hinder  parts — then  springs,  as  broke  from  bonds. 

And  rampant  shakes  his  brinded  mane  ;  the  ounce, 

The  libbard,  and  the  tiger,  as  the  mole 

Rising,  the  crumbled  earth  above  them  threw 

In  hillocks  ;  the  swift  stag  from  underground 

Bore  up  his  branching  head  ;  scarce  from  his  mould 

Behemoth,  biggest  born  of  earth,  upheaved 

His  vastness  ;  fleeced  the  flocks  and  bleating  rose 

As  plants  ;  ambiguous  between  sea  and  land, 

The  river-horse  and  scaly  crocodile. 

At  once  came  forth  whatever  creeps  the  ground, 

Insect  or  worm." 

There  is  no  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of  this 
statement,  nor  as  to  what  a  man  of  Milton's 
genius  expected  would  have  been  actually  visible 
to  an  eye-witness  of  this  mode  of  origination  of 
livino^  things. 

The  third  hj^pothesis,  or  the  hypothesis  of 
evolution,  supposes  that,  at  any  comparatively  late 
period  of  past  time,  our  imaginary  spectator  would 
meet  with  a  state  of  things  very  similar  to  that 
which  now  obtains ;  but  that  the  likeness  of  the 
past  to  the  present  would  gradually  become  less 
and  less,  in  proportion  to  the  remoteness  of  his 
period  of  observation  from  the  present  day ;  that 


in 


LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION  55 


the  existing  distribution  of  mountains  and  plains, 
of  rivers  and  seas,  would  show  itself  to  be  the 
product  of  a  slow  process  of  natural  change 
operating  upon  more  and  more  widely  different 
antecedent  conditions  of  the  mineral  frame-work 
of  the  earth ;  until,  at  length,  in  place  of  that 
framework,  he  would  behold  only  a  vast  nebulous 
mass,  representing  the  constituents  of  the 
sun  and  of  the  planetary  bodies.  Preceding  the 
forms  of  life  which  now  exist,  our  observer 
would  see  animals  and  plants,  not  identical  with 
them,  but  like  them,  increasing  their  differences 
with  their  antiquity  and,  at  the  same  time, 
becoming  simpler  and  simpler ;  until,  finally,  the 
world  of  life  would  present  nothing  but  that  un- 
differentiated protoplasmic  matter  which,  so  far 
as  our  present  knowledge  goes,  is  the  common 
foundation  of  all  vital  activity. 

The  hypothesis  of  evolution  supposes  that  in  all 
this  vast  progression  there  would  be  no  breach  of 
continuity,  no  point  at  which  we  could  say  "  This 
is  a  natural  process,"  and  "  This  is  not  a  natural 
process  ; ''  but  that  the  whole  might  be  compared 
to  that  wonderful  operation  of  development  which 
may  be  seen  going  on  every  day  under  our  eyes,  in 
virtue  of  which  there  arises,  out  of  the  semi-fluid 
comparatively  homogeneous  substance  which  we 
call  an  egg,  the  complicated  organisation  of  one  of 
the  higher  animals.  That,  in  a  few  words,  is  what 
is  meant  by  the  hypothesis  of  evolution. 


56  LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION  ill 

I  have  already  suggested  that,  in  dealing  with 
these  three  hypotheses,  in  endeavouring  to  form  a 
judgment  as  to  which  of  them  is  the  more  worthy 
of  belief,  or  whether  none  is  worthy  of  belief — in 
which  case  our  condition  of  mind  should  be  that 
suspension  of  judgment  which  is  so  difficult  to  all 
but  trained  intellects — we  should  be  indifferent 
to  all  a  'priori  considerations.  The  question  is  a 
question  of  historical  fact.  The  universe  has  come 
into  existence  somehow  or  other,  and  the  problem 
is,  whether  it  came  into  existence  in  one  fashion, 
or  whether  it  came  into  existence  in  another ;  and, 
as  an  essential  preliminary  to  further  discussion, 
permit  me  to  say  two  or  three  words  as  to  the 
nature  and  the  kinds  of  historical  evidence. 

The  evidence  as  to  the  occurrence  of  any  event 
in  past  time  may  be  ranged  under  two  heads 
which,  for  convenience'  sake,  I  will  speak  of  as 
testimonial  evidence  and  as  circumstantial  evi- 
dence. By  testimonial  evidence  I  mean  human 
testimony  ;  and  by  circumstantial  evidence  I 
mean  evidence  which  is  not  human  testimony. 
Let  me  illustrate  by  a  familiar  example  what  I 
understand  by  these  two  kinds  of  evidence,  and 
what  is  to  be  said  respecting  their  value. 

Suppose  that  a  man  tells  you  that  he  saw  a 
person  strike  another  and  kill  him ;  that  is  testi- 
monial evidence  of  the  fact  of  murder.  But  it  is 
possible  to  have  circumstantial  evidence  of  the 
fact  of  murder;  that  is  to  say,  you  may  find  a 


in  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  57 

man  dying  with  a  wound  upon  his  head  having 
exactly  the  form  and  character  of  the  wound 
which  is  made  by  an  axe,  and,  with  due  care  in 
taking  surrounding  circumstances  into  account, 
you  may  conchide  with  the  utmost  certainty  that 
the  man  has  been  murdered ;  that  his  death  is 
the  consequence  of  a  blow  inflicted  by  another 
man  with  that  implement.  We  are  very  much  in 
the  habit  of  considering  circumstantial  evidence 
as  of  less  value  than  testimonial  evidence,  and  it 
may  be  that,  where  the  circumstances  are  not 
perfectly  clear  and  intelligible,  it  is  a  dangerous 
and  unsafe  kind  of  evidence  ;  but  it  must  not  be 
forgotten  that,  in  many  cases,  circumstantial  is 
quite  as  conclusive  as  testimonial  evidence,  and 
that,  not  unfrequently,  it  is  a  great  deal  weightier 
than  testimonial  evidence.  For  example,  take 
the  case  to  which  I  referred  just  now.  The  cir- 
cumstantial evidence  may  be  better  and  more 
convincing  than  the  testimonial  evidence;  for  it 
may  be  impossible,  under  the  conditions  that  I 
have  defined,  to  suppose  that  the  man  met  his 
death  from  any  cause  but  the  violent  blow  of  an 
axe  wielded  by  another  man.  The  circumstantial 
evidence  in  favour  of  a  murder  having  been  com- 
mitted, in  that  case,  is  as  complete  and  as  con- 
vincing as  evidence  can  be.  It  is  evidence  which 
is  open  to  no  doubt  and  to  no  falsification.  But 
the  testimony  of  a  witness  is  open  to  multitudin- 
ous doubts.     He  may  have  been  mistaken.     He 


58  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  m 

may  have  been  actuated  by  malice.  It  has  con- 
stantly happened  that  even  an  accurate  man  has 
declared  that  a  thing  has  happened  in  this,  that, 
or  the  other  way,  when  a  careful  analysis  of  the 
circumstantial  evidence  has  shown  that  it  did  not 
happen  in  that  way,  but  in  some  other  way. 

We  may  now  consider  the  evidence  in  favour  of 
or  against  the  three  hypotheses.  Let  me  first 
direct  your  attention  to  what  is  to  be  said  about 
the  hypothesis  of  the  eternity  of  the  state  of 
things  in  which  we  now  live.  "What  will  first 
strike  you  is,  that  it  is  a  hypothesis  which, 
whether  true  or  false,  is  not  capable  of  verifica- 
tion by  any  evidence.  For,  in  order  to  obtain 
either  circumstantial  or  testimonial  evidence  suffi- 
cient to  prove  the  eternity  of  duration  of  the 
present  state  of  nature,  you  must  have  an  eternity 
of  witnesses  or  an  infinity  of  circumstances,  and 
neither  of  these  is  attainable.  It  is  utterly  im- 
possible that  such  evidence  should  be  carried 
beyond  a  certain  point  of  time  ;  and  all  that 
could  be  said,  at  most,  would  be,  that  so  far 
as  the  evidence  could  be  traced,  there  was  nothing 
to  contradict  the  hypothesis.  But  when  you  look, 
not  to  the  testimonial  evidence — which,  consider- 
ing the  relative  insignificance  of  the  antiquity  of 
human  records,  might  not  be  good  for  much  in 
this  case — but  to  the  circumstantial  evidence, 
then  you  find  that  this  hypothesis  is  absolutely 
incompatible   with   such   evidence   as   we   have; 


ni 


LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  59 


which  is  of  so  plain  and  so  simple  a  character 
that  it  is  impossible  in  any  way  to  escape  from 
the  conclusions  which  it  forces  upon  us. 

You  are,  doubtless,  all  aware  that  the  outer 
substance  of  the  earth,  which  alone  is  accessible 
to  direct  observation,  is  not  of  a  homogeneous 
character,  but  that  it  is  made  np  of  a  number  of 
layers  or  strata,  the  titles  of  the  principal  groups 
of  which  are  placed  upon  the  accompanying 
diagram.  Each  of  these  groups  represents  a 
number  of  beds  of  sand,  of  stone,  of  clay,  of  slate, 
and  of  various  other  materials. 

On  careful  examination,  it  is  found  that  the 
materials  of  which  each  of  these  layers  of  more 
or  less  hard  rock  are  composed  are,  for  the  most 
part,  of  the  same  nature  as  those  which  are  at 
present  being  formed  under  known  conditions  on 
the  surface  of  the  earth.  For  example,  the  chalk, 
which  constitutes  a  great  part  of  the  Cretaceous 
formation  in  some  parts  of  the  world,  is  prac- 
tically identical  in  its  physical  and  chemical 
characters  with  a  substance  which  is  now  being 
formed  at  the  bottom  of  the  Atlantic  Ocean,  and 
covers  an  enormous  area ;  other  beds  of  rock  are 
comparable  with  the  sands  which  are  being 
formed  upon  sea-shores,  packed  together,  and  so 
on.  Thus,  omitting  rocks  of  igneous  origin,  it  is 
demonstrable  that  all  these  beds  of  stone,  of 
which  a  total  of  not  less  than  seventy  thousand 
feet    is    known,   have    been   formed    by   natural 


Post-Tertiary  and  Recent. 
Pliocene. 


Jurassic  or  Oolitic 

Triassic  (Kew  Red  Sandstone), 

Permian. 

•Carboniferous. 


Devonian  or  Old  Red  Sandstonflt 


_  Huronian. 
...  Laurentian. 


Fig.  1. — Ideal  Section  of  the  Crust  of  the  Earth, 


m  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  61 

agencies,  either  out  of  the  waste  and  washing  of 
the  dry  land,  or  else  by  the  accumulation  of  the 
exuviae  of  plants  and  animals.  Many  of  these 
strata  are  full  of  such  exuviae — the  so-called 
*'  fossils."  Remains  of  thousands  of  species  of 
animals  and  plants,  as  perfectly  recognisable  as 
those  of  existing  forms  of  life  which  you  meet 
with  in  museums,  or  as  the  shells  which  you  pick 
up  upon  the  sea-beach,  have  been  imbedded  in 
the  ancient  sands,  or  muds,  or  limestones,  just  as 
they  are  being  imbedded  now,  in  sandy,  or  clayey, 
or  calcareous  subaqueous  deposits.  They  furnish 
us  with  a  record,  the  general  nature  of  which  can- 
not be  misinterpreted,  of  the  kinds  of  things  that 
have  lived  upon  the  surface  of  the  earth  during 
the  time  that  is  registered  by  this  great  thickness 
of  stratified  rocks.  But  even  a  superficial  study  of 
these  fossils  shows  us  that  the  animals  and  plants 
which  live  at  the  present  time  have  had  only  a  tem- 
porary duration ;  for  the  remains  of  such  modern 
forms  of  life  are  met  with,  for  the  most  part,  only 
in  the  uppermost  or  latest  tertiaries,  and  their 
number  rapidly  diminishes  in  the  lower  deposits  of 
that  epoch.  In  the  older  tertiaries,  the  places  of 
existing  animals  and  plants  are  taken  by  other 
forms,  as  numerous  and  diversified  as  those  which 
live  now  in  the  same  localities,  but  more  or  less 
different  from  them ;  in  the  mesozoic  rocks,  these 
are  replaced  by  others  yet  more  divergent  from 
modern  types;  and,  in  the  palaeozoic  formations,  the 


62  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  m 

contrast  is  still  more  marked.  Thus  the  circum- 
stantial evidence  absolutely  negatives  the  concep- 
tion of  the  eternity  of  the  present  condition  of 
things.  We  can  say,  with  certainty,  that  the 
present  condition  of  things  has  existed  for  a  com- 
paratively short  period  ;  and  that,  so  far  as  animal 
and  veo^etable  nature  are  concerned,  it  has  been 
preceded  by  a  different  condition.  We  can  pursue 
this  evidence  until  we  reach  the  lowest  of  the 
stratified  rocks,  in  which  we  lose  the  indications  of 
life  altogether.  The  hypothesis  of  the  eternity  of 
the  present  state  of  nature  may  therefore  be  put 
out  of  court. 

We  now  come  to  what  I  will  term  Milton's 
hypothesis — the  hypothesis  that  the  present  con- 
dition of  things  has  endured  for  a  comparatively 
short  time ;  and,  at  the  commencement  of  that 
time,  came  into  existence  within  the  course  of  six 
days.  I  doubt  not  that  it  may  have  excited  some 
surprise  in  your  minds  that  I  should  have  spoken 
of  this  as  Milton's  hypothesis,  rather  than  that  I 
should  have  chosen  the  terms  which  are  more 
customary,  such  as  "  the  doctrine  of  creation,"  or 
"the  Biblical  doctrine,"  or  "the  doctrine  of 
Moses,"  all  of  which  denominations,  as  applied  to 
the  hypothesis  to  which  I  have  just  referred,  are 
certainly  much  more  familiar  to  you  than  the 
title  of  the  Miltonic  hypothesis.  But  I  have  had 
what  I  cannot  but  think  are  very  weighty  reasons 
for  taking  the  course  which  I  have  pursued.     In 


XII  LECTURES    ON   EVOLUTION"  63 

the  first  place,  I  have  discarded  the  title  of  the 
"  doctrine  of  creation,"  because  my  present  busi- 
ness is  not  with  the  question  why  the  objects 
which  constitute  Nature  came  into  existence,  but 
when  they  came  into  existence,  and  in  what  order. 
This  is  as  strictly  a  historical  question  as  the 
question  when  the  Angles  and  the  Jutes  invaded 
England,  and  whether  they  preceded  or  followed 
the  Romans.  But  the  question  about  creation  is 
a  philosophical  problem,  and  one  which  cannot 
be  solved,  or  even  approached,  by  the  historical 
method.  What  we  want  to  learn  is,  whether  the 
facts,  so  far  as  they  are  known,  afford  evidence 
that  things  arose  in  the  way  described  by  Milton, 
or  whether  they  do  not ;  and,  when  that  question 
is  settled,  it  will  be  time  enough  to  inquire  into 
the  causes  of  their  origination. 

In  the  second  place,  I  have  not  spoken  of  this 
doctrine  as  the  Biblical  doctrine.  It  is  quite  true 
that  persons  as  diverse  in  their  general  views  as 
Milton  the  Protestant  and  the  celebrated  Jesuit 
Father  Suarez,  each  put  upon  the  first  chapter  of 
Genesis  the  interpretation  embodied  in  Milton's 
poem.  It  is  quite  true  that  this  interpretation  is 
that  which  has  been  instilled  into  every  one  of  us 
in  our  childhood  ;  but  I  do  not  for  one  moment 
venture  to  say  that  it  can  proj^erly  be  called  the 
Biblical  doctrine.  It  is  not  my  business,  and 
does  not  lie  within  my  competency,  to  say  what 
the   Hebrew   text   does,   and   what    it   does  not 


64  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  in 

signify ;  moreover,  were  I  to  affirm  that  this  is  the 
Biblical  doctrine,  I  should  be  met  by  the  authority 
of  many  eminent  scholars,  to  say  nothiDg  of  men 
of  science,  who,  at  various  times,  have  absolutely 
denied  that  any  such  doctrine  is  to  be  found  in 
Genesis.  If  we  are  to  listen  to  many  expositors  of 
DO  mean  authority,  we  must  believe  that  what 
seems  so  clearly  defined  in  Genesis — as  if  very 
great  pains  had  been  taken  that  there  should  be 
no  possibility  of  mistake — is  not  the  meaning  of 
the  text  at  all.  The  account  is  divided  into 
periods  that  we  may  make  just  as  long  or  as  short 
as  convenience  requires.  We  are  also  to  under- 
stand that  it  is  consistent  with  the  original  text  to 
believe  that  the  most  complex  plants  and  animals 
may  have  been  evolved  by  natural  processes, 
lasting  for  millions  of  years,  out  of  structureless 
rudiments.  A  person  who  is  not  a  Hebrew 
scholar  can  only  stand  aside  and  admire  the 
marvellous  flexibility  of  a  language  which  admits 
of  such  diverse  interpretations.  But  assuredly,  in 
the  face  of  such  contradictions  of  authority 
upon  matters  respecting  which  he  is  incompetent 
to  form  any  judgment,  he  will  abstain,  as  I  do, 
from  giving  any  opinion. 

In  the  third  place,  I  have  carefully  abstained 
from  speaking  of  this  as  the  Mosaic  doctrine, 
because  we  are  now  assured  upon  the  authority  of 
the  highest  critics,  and  even  of  dignitaries  of  the 
Church,  that  there  is   no   evidence  that   Moses 


ITT 


LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  65 


wrote  the  Book  of  Genesis,  or  knew  anything 
about  it.  You  will  understand  that  I  give  no 
judgment — it  would  be  an  impertinence  upon  my 
part  to  volunteer  even  a  suggestion — upon  such  a 
subject.  But,  that  being  the  state  of  opinion 
among  the  scholars  and  the  clergy,  it  is  well  for 
the  unlearned  in  Hebrew  lore,  and  for  the  laity, 
to  avoid  entangling  themselves  in  such  a  vexed 
question.  Happily,  Milton  leaves  us  no  excuse 
for  doubting  what  he  means,  and  I  shall  therefore 
be  safe  in  speaking  of  the  opinion  in  question  as 
the  Miltonic  hypothesis. 

Now  we  have  to  test  that  hypothesis.  For  my 
part,  I  have  no  prejudice  one  way  or  the  other. 
If  there  is  evidence  in  favour  of  this  view,  I  am 
burdened  by  no  theoretical  difficulties  in  the  way 
of  accepting  it ;  but  there  must  be  evidence. 
Scientific  men  get  an  awkward  habit — no,  I  won't 
call  it  that,  for  it  is  a  valuable  habit — of  believing 
nothing  unless  there  is  evidence  for  it ;  and  they 
have  a  way  of  looking  upon  belief  which  is  not 
based  upon  evidence,  not  only  as  illogical,  but  as 
immoral.  We  will,  if  you  please,  test  this  view 
by  the  circumstantial  evidence  alone;  for,  from 
what  I  have  said,  you  will  understand  that  I  do 
not  propose  to  discuss  the  question  of  what  testi- 
monial evidence  is  to  be  adduced  in  favour  of  it. 
If  those  whose  business  it  is  to  judge  are  not  at 
one  as  to  the  authenticity  of  the  only  evidence  of 
that  kind  which  is  offered,  nor  as  to  the  facts  to 

94 


66  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  m 

which  it  bears  witness,  the  discussion  of  such 
evidence  is  superfluous. 

But  I  may  be  permitted  to  regret  this  necessity 
of  rejecting  the  testimonial  evidence  the  less, 
because  the  examination  of  the  circumstantial 
evidence  leads  to  the  conclusion,  not  only  that 
it  is  incompetent  to  justify  the  hypothesis,  but 
that,  so  far  as  it  goes,  it  is  contrary  to  the 
hypothesis. 

The  considerations  upon  which  I  base  this 
conclusion  are  of  the  simplest  possible  character. 
The  Miltonic  hypothesis  contains  assertions  of  a 
very  definite  character  relating  to  the  succession 
of  living  forms.  It  is  stated  that  plants,  for 
example,  made  their  appearance  upon  the  third 
day,  and  not  before.  And  you  will  understand 
that  what  the  poet  means  by  plants  are  such 
plants  as  now  live,  the  ancestors,  in  the  ordinary 
way  of  propagation  of  like  by  like,  of  the  trees 
and  shrubs  which  flourish  in  the  present  world. 
It  must  needs  be  so;  for,  if  they  were  different, 
either  the  existing  plants  have  been  the  result 
of  a  separate  origination  since  that  described  by 
Milton,  of  which  we  have  no  record,  nor  any 
ground  for  supposition  that  such  an  occurrence 
has  taken  place;  or  else  they  have  arisen  by  a 
process  of  evolution  from  the  original  stocks. 

In  the  second  place,  it  is  clear  that  there  was 
no  animal  life  before  the  fifth  day,  and  that,  on 
the  fifth  day,  aquatic  animals  and  birds  appeared. 


Ill 


LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  07 


And  it  is  further  clear  that  terrestrial  living 
things,  other  than  birds,  made  their  appearance 
upon  the  sixth  day  and  not  before.  Hence,  it 
follows  that,  if,  in  the  large  mass  of  circumstantial 
evidence  as  to  what  really  has  happened  in  the 
past  history  of  the  globe  we  find  indications  of 
the  existence  of  terrestrial  animals,  other  than 
birds,  at  a  certain  period,  it  is  perfectly  certain 
that  all  that  has  taken  place,  since  that  time,  must 
be  referred  to  the  sixth  day. 

In  the  great  Carboniferous  formation,  whence 
America  derives  so  vast  a  proportion  of  her  actual 
and  potential  wealth,  in  the  beds  of  coal  which 
have  been  formed  from  the  vegetation  of  that 
period,  we  find  abundant  evidence  of  the  existence 
of  terrestrial  animals.  They  have  been  described, 
not  only  by  European  but  by  your  own  naturalists. 
There  are  to  be  found  numerous  insects  allied  to 
our  cockroaches.  There  are  to  be  found  spiders 
and  scorpions  of  large  size,  the  latter  so  similar  to 
existing  scorpions  that  it  requires  the  practised 
eye  of  the  naturalist  to  distinguish  them.  Inas- 
much as  these  animals  can  be  proved  to  have 
been  alive  in  the  Carboniferous  epoch,  it  is  per- 
fectly clear  that,  if  the  Miltonic  account  is  to  be 
accepted,  the  huge  mass  of  rocks  extending  from 
the  middle  of  the  Palaeozoic  formations  to  the 
uppermost  members  of  the  series,  must  belong  to 
the  day  which  is  termed  by  Milton  the  sixth. 
But,  further,  it  is  expressly  stated  that  aquatic 


68  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  m 

animals  took  their  origin  on  the  fifth  day,  and  not 
before ;  hence,  all  formations  in  which  remains  of 
aquatic  animals  can  be  proved  to  exist,  and  which 
therefore  testify  that  such  animals  lived  at  the 
time  w4ien  these  formations  were  in  course  of  de- 
position, must  have  been  deposited  during  or 
since  the  period  which  Milton  speaks  of  as  the 
fifth  day.  But  there  is  absolutely  no  fossiliferous 
formation  in  which  the  remains  of  aquatic  animals 
are  absent.  The  oldest  fossils  in  the  Silurian 
rocks  are  exuvise  of  marine  animals;  and  if  the 
view  which  is  entertained  by  Principal  Dawson 
and  Dr.  Carpenter  respecting  the  nature  of  the 
Uozoon  be  well-founded,  aquatic  animals  existed 
at  a  period  as  far  antecedent  to  the  deposition  of 
the  coal  as  the  coal  is  from  us ;  inasmuch  as  the 
Uozoon  is  met  with  in  those  Lauren tian  strata 
which  lie  at  the  bottom  of  the  series  of  stratified 
rocks.  Hence  it  follows,  plainly  enough,  that  the 
whole  series  of  stratified  rocks,  if  they  are  to  be 
brought  into  harmony  with  Milton,  must  be  re- 
ferred to  the  fifth  and  sixth  days,  and  that  we 
cannot  hope  to  find  the  slightest  trace  of  the 
products  of  the  earlier  days  in  the  geological 
record.  When  we  consider  these  simple  facts,  we 
see  how  absolutely  futile  are  the  attempts  that 
have  been  made  to  draw  a  parallel  between  the 
story  told  by  so  much  of  the  crust  of  the  earth 
as  is  known  to' us  and  the  story  which  Milton 
tells.     The  whole  series  of  fossiliferous  stratified 


Ill  LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION  69 

rocks  must  be  referred  to  the  last  two  days ;  and 
neither  the  Carboniferous,  nor  any  other,  for- 
mation can  afford  evidence  of  the  work  of  the 
third  day. 

Not  only  is  there  this  objection  to  any  attempt 
to  establish  a  harmony  between  the  Miltonic  ac- 
count and  the  facts  recorded  in  the  fossiliferous 
rocks,  but  there  is  a  further  difficulty.  According 
to  the  Miltonic  account,  the  order  in  wliich 
animals  should  have  made  their  appearance  in 
the  stratified  rocks  would  be  this:  Fishes,  in- 
cluding the  great  whales,  and  birds ;  after  them, 
all  varieties  of  terrestrial  animals  except  birds. 
Nothing  could  be  further  from  the  facts  as  we 
find  them ;  we  know  of  not  the  slightest  evidence 
of  the  existence  of  birds  before  the  Jurassic,  or 
perhaps  the  Triassic,  formation  ;  while  terrestrial 
animals,  as  we  have  just  seen,  occur  in  the  Car- 
boniferous rocks. 

If  there  were  any  harmony  between  the  Mil- 
tonic account  and  the  circumstantial  evidence,  we 
ought  to  have  abundant  evidence  of  the  existence 
of  birds  in  the  Carboniferous,  the  Devonian,  and 
the  Silurian  rocks.  I  need  hardly  say  that  this  is 
not  the  case,  and  that  not  a  trace  of  birds  makes 
its  appearance  until  the  far  later  period  which  I 
have  mentioned. 

And  again,  if  it  be  true  that  all  varieties  of 
fishes  and  the  great  whales,  and  the  like,  made 
their  appearance  on  the  fifth  day,  we  ought  to  find 


70  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION 


III 


the  remains  of  these  animals  in  the  older  rocks — 
in  those  which  were  deposited  before  the  Carbon- 
iferous epoch.  Fishes  we  do  find,  in  considerable 
number  and  variety;  but  the  great  whales  are 
absent,  and  the  fishes  are  not  such  as  now  live. 
Not  one  solitary  species  of  fish  now  in  existence  is 
to  be  found  in  the  Devonian  or  Silurian  formations. 
Hence  we  are  introduced  afresh  to  the  dilemma 
which  I  have  already  placed  before  you :  either 
the  animals  which  came  into  existence  on  the  fifth 
day  were  not  such  as  those  which  are  found  at 
present,  are  not  the  direct  and  immediate  ancestors 
of  those  which  now  exist ;  in  which  case,  either 
fresh  creations  of  which  nothing  is  said,  or  a 
process  of  evolution,  must  have  occurred ;  or  else 
the  whole  story  must  be  given  up,  as  not  only 
devoid  of  any  circumstantial  evidence,  but  contrary 
to  such  evidence  as  exists. 

I  placed  before  you  in  a  few  words,  some  little 
time  ago,  a  statement  of  the  sum  and  substance  of 
Milton's  hypothesis.  Let  me  now  try  to  state  as 
briefly,  the  effect  of  the  circumstantial  evidence 
bearing  upon  the  past  history  of  the  earth  which 
is  furnished,  without  the  possibility  of  mistake, 
with  no  chance  of  error  as  to  its  chief  features,  by 
the  stratified  rocks.  What  we  find  is,  that  the 
great  series  of  formations  represents  a  period  of 
time  of  which  our  human  chronologies  hardly 
afford  us  a  unit  of  measure.  I  will  not  pretend 
to  say  how  we  ought  to  estimate  this  time,  in 


Ill  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  71 

millions  or  in  billions  of  years.  For  my  purpose, 
the  determination  of  its  absolute  duration  is 
wholly  unessential.  But  that  the  time  was  enor- 
mous there  can  be  no  question. 

It  results  from  the  simplest  methods  of  inter- 
pretation, that  leaving  out  of  view  certain  patches 
of  metamorphosed  rocks,  and  certain  volcanic 
products,  all  that  is  now  dry  land  has  once  been 
at  the  bottom  of  the  waters.  It  is  perfectly 
certain  that,  at  a  comparatively  recent  period 
of  the  world's  history — the  Cretaceous  epoch — 
none  of  the  great  physical  features  which  at 
present  mark  the  surface  of  the  globe  existed. 
It  is  certain  that  the  Rocky  Mountains  were  not. 
It  is  certain  that  the  Himalaya  Mountains  were 
not.  It  is  certain  that  the  Alps  and  the  Pyrenees 
had  no  existence.  The  evidence  is  of  the  plainest 
possible  character,  and  is  simply  this : — We  find 
raised  up  on  the  flanks  of  these  mountains,  ele- 
vated by  the  forces  of  upheaval  which  have  given 
rise  to  them,  masses  of  Cretaceous  rock  which 
formed  the  bottom  of  the  sea  before  those  moun- 
tains existed.  It  is  therefore  clear  that  the 
elevatory  forces  which  gave  rise  to  the  mountains 
operated  subsequently  to  the  Cretaceous  epoch ; 
and  that  the  mountains  themselves  are  largely 
made  up  of  the  materials  deposited  in  the  sea 
which  once  occupied  their  place.  As  we  go  back 
in  time,  we  meet  with  constant  alternations  of 
sea  and   land,  of  estuary  and   open  ocean;  and. 


72  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  m 

in  correspondence  with  these  alternations,  we 
observe  the  changes  in  the  fauna  and  flora  to 
which  I  have  referred. 

But  the  inspection  of  these  changes  give  us 
no  right  to  beheve  that  there  has  been  any  dis- 
continuity in  natural  processes.  There  is  no  trace 
of  general  cataclysms,  of  universal  deluges,  or 
sudden  destructions  of  a  whole  fauna  or  flora. 
The  appearances  which  were  formerly  interpreted 
in  that  way  have  all  been  shown  to  be  delusive, 
as  our  knowledge  has  increased  and  as  the  blanks 
which  formerly  appeared  to  exist  between  the 
different  formations  have  been  filled  up.  That 
there  is  no  absolute  break  between  formation  and 
formation,  that  there  has  been  no  sudden  dis- 
appearance of  all  the  forms  of  life  and  replacement 
of  them  by  others,  but  that  changes  have  gone 
on  slowly  and  gradually,  that  one  type  has  died 
out  and  another  has  taken  its  place,  and  that 
thus,  by  insensible  degrees,  one  fauna  has  been 
replaced  by  au other,  are  conclusions  strengthened 
by  constantly  increasing  evidence.  So  that  within 
the  whole  of  the  immense  period  indicated  by  the 
fossiliferous  stratified  rocks,  there  is  assuredly  not 
the  slightest  proof  of  any  break  in  the  uniformity 
of  Nature's  operations,  no  indication  that  events 
have  folloAved  other  than  a  clear  and  orderly 
sequence. 

That,  I  say,  is  the  natural  and  obvious  teaching 
of  the  circumstantial  evidence  contained  in  the 


ni 


LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION"  73 


stratified  rocks.  I  leave  you  to  consider  how  far, 
by  any  ingenuity  of  interpretation,  by  any  stretch- 
ing of  the  meaning  of  language,  it  can  be  brought 
into  harmony  with  the  Miltonic  hypothesis. 

There  remains  the  third  hypothesis,  that  of 
which  I  have  spoken  as  the  hypothesis  of  evolu- 
tion ;  and  I  purpose  that,  in  lectures  to  come,  we 
should  discuss  it  as  carefully  as  we  have  con- 
sidered the  other  two  hypotheses.  I  need  not  say 
that  it  is  quite  hopeless  to  look  for  testimonial 
evidence  of  evolution.  The  very  nature  of  the 
case  precludes  the  possibility  of  such  evidence,  for 
the  human  race  can  no  more  be  expected  to  testify 
to  its  own  origin,  than  a  child  can  be  tendered  as 
a  witness  of  its  own  birth.  Our  sole  inquiry  is, 
what  foundation  circumstantial  evidence  lends  to 
the  hypothesis,  or  whether  it  lends  none,  or 
whether  it  controverts  the  hypothesis.  I  shall 
deal  with  the  matter  entirely  as  a  question  of 
history.  I  shall  not  indulge  in  the  discussion  of 
any  speculative  probabilities.  I  shall  not  attempt 
to  show  that  Nature  is  unintellig^ible  unless  we 
adopt  some  such  hypothesis.  For  anything  I 
know  about  the  matter,  it  may  be  the  way  of 
Nature  to  be  unintelligible ;  she  is  often  puzzling, 
and  I  have  no  reason  to  suppose  that  she  is  bound 
to  fit  herself  to  our  notions. 

I  shall  place  before  you  three  kinds  of  evidence 
entirely  based  upon  what  is  known  of  the  forms 
of  animal  life  which  are  contained   in  the  series 


74  LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION  m 

of  stratified  rocks.  I  shall  endeavour  to  show  you 
that  there  is  one  kind  of  evidence  which  is  neutral, 
which  neither  helps  evolution  nor  is  inconsistent 
with  it.  I  shall  then  bring  forward  a  second  kind 
of  evidence  which  indicates  a  strong  probability  in 
favour  of  evolution,  but  does  not  prove  it ;  and, 
lastly,  I  shal]  adduce  a  third  kind  of  evidence 
which,  being  as  complete  as  any  evidence  which 
we  can  hope  to  obtain  upon  such  a  subject,  and 
being  wholly  and  strikingly  in  favour  of  evolution, 
may  fairly  be  called  demonstrative  evidence  of  its 
occurrence. 


LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION 
II 

THE  HYPOTHESIS  OF  EVOLUTION.       THE  NEUTEAL 
AND  THE   FAVOURABLE   EVIDENCE. 

In  the  preceding  lecture  I  pointed  out  that  there 
are  three  hypotheses  which  may  be  entertained, 
and  which  have  been  entertained,  respecting  the 
past  history  of  life  upon  the  globe.  According  to 
the  first  of  these  hypotheses,  living  beings,  such  as 
now  exist,  have  existed  from  all  eternity  upon  this 
earth.  We  tested  that  hypothesis  by  the  circum- 
stantial evidence,  as  I  called  it,  which  is  furnished 
by  the  fossil  remains  contained  in  the  earth's  crust, 
and  we  found  that  it  was  obviously  untenable.  I 
then  proceeded  to  consider  the  second  hypothesis, 
which  I  termed  the  Miltonic  hypothesis,  not  be- 
cause it  is  of  any  particular  consequence  whether 
John  Milton  seriously  entertained  it  or  not,  but 
because  it  is  stated  in  a  clear  and  unmistakable 
manner  in  his  great  poem.  I  pointed  oat  to  you 
that  the  evidence  at  our  command  as  completely 
and  fully  negatives  that  hypothesis  as  it  did  the 


76  LECTUEES   ON   EVOLUTION  m 

preceding  one.  And  I  confess  that  1  had  too 
much  respect  for  your  intelligence  to  think  it 
necessary  to  add  that  the  negation  was  equally 
clear  and  equally  valid,  whatever  the  source  from 
which  that  hypothesis  might  be  derived,  or  what- 
ever the  authority  by  which  it  might  be  supported. 
I  further  stated  that,  according  to  the  third  hypo- 
thesis, or  that  of  evolution,  the  existing  state  of 
things  is  the  last  term  of  a  long  series  of  states, 
which,  when  traced  back,  would  be  found  to  show 
no  interruption  and  no  breach  in  the  continuity 
of  natural  causation.  I  propose,  in  the  present 
and  the  following  lecture,  to  test  this  hypothesis 
rigorously  by  the  evidence  at  command,  and  to 
inquire  how  far  that  evidence  can  be  said  to  be 
indifferent  to  it,  how  far  it  can  be  said  to  be 
favourable  to  it,  and,  finally,  how  far  it  can  be 
said  to  be  demonstrative. 

From  almost  the  origin  of  the  discussions  about 
the  existing  condition  of  the  animal  and  vegetable 
worlds  and  the  causes  which  have  determined 
that  condition,  an  argument  has  been  put  forward 
as  an  objection  to  evolution,  which  we  shall  have 
to  consider  very  seriously.  It  is  an  argument 
which  was  first  clearly  stated  by  Cuvier  in  his 
criticism  of  the  doctrines  propounded  by  his  great 
contemporary,  Lamarck.  The  French  expedition 
to  EgyjDt  had  called  the  attention  of  learned  men 
to  the  wonderful  store  of  antiquities  in  that 
country,  and   there   had   been   brought   back   to 


m  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  77 

France  numerous  mummified  corpses  of  the 
animals  which  the  ancient  Egyptians  revered  and 
preserved,  and  which,  at  a  reasonable  computa- 
tion, must  have  lived  not  less  than  three  or  four 
thousand  years  before  the  time  at  which  they 
were  thus  brought  to  light.  Cuvier  endeavoured 
to  test  the  hypothesis  that  animals  have  under- 
gone gradual  and  progressive  modifications  of 
structure,  by  comparing  the  skeletons  and  such 
other  parts  of  the  mummies  as  were  in  a  fitting 
state  of  preservation,  with  the  corresponding  parts 
of  the  representatives  of  the  same  species  now  liv- 
ing in  Egypt.  He  arrived  at  the  conviction  that 
no  appreciable  change  had  taken  place  in  these 
animals  in  the  course  of  this  considerable  lapse  of 
time,  and  the  justice  of  his  conclusion  is  not 
disputed. 

It  is  obvious  that,  if  it  can  be  proved  that 
animals  have  endured,  without  undergoing  any 
demonstrable  change  of  structure,  for  so  long  a 
period  as  four  thousand  years,  no  form  of  the 
hypothesis  of  evolution  which  assumes  that  ani- 
mals undergo  a  constant  and  necessary  progressive 
change  can  be  tenable  ;  unless,  indeed,  it  be  further 
assumed  that  four  thousand  years  is  too  short  a 
time  for  the  production  of  a  change  sufficiently 
great  to  be  detected. 

But  it  is  no  less  plain  that  if  the  process  of 
evolution  of  animals  is  not  independent  of  sur- 
rounding  conditions;    if   it   may   be  indefinitely 


78  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  m 

hastened  or  retarded  by  variations  in  these  con- 
ditions ;  or  if  evolution  is  simply  a  process  of 
accommodation  to  varying  conditions ;  the  argu- 
ment against  the  hypothesis  of  evolution  based  on 
the  unchanged  character  of  the  Egyptian  fauna  ia 
worthless.  For  the  monuments  which  are  coeval 
with  the  mummies  testify  as  strongly  to  the 
absence  of  change  in  the  physical  geography  and 
the  general  conditions  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  for 
the  time  in  question,  as  the  mummies  do  to  the 
unvarying  characters  of  its  living  population. 

The  progress  of  research  since  Cuvier's  time 
has  supplied  far  more  striking  examples  of  the 
long  duration  of  specific  forms  of  life  than 
those  which  are  furnished  by  the  mummified 
Ibises  and  Crocodiles  of  Egypt.  A  remarkable 
case  is  to  be  found  in  your  own  country,  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  falls  of  Niagara.  In  the 
immediate  vicinity  of  the  whirlpool,  and  again 
upon  Goat  Island,  in  the  superficial  deposits  which 
cover  the  surface  of  the  rocky  subsoil  in  those 
regions,  there  are  found  remains  of  animals  in 
perfect  preservation,  and  among  them,  shells  be- 
longing to  exactly  the  same  species  as  those  which 
at  present  inhabit  the  still  waters  of  Lake  Erie. 
It  is  evident,  from  the  structure  of  the  country, 
that  these  animal  remains  were  deposited  in  the 
beds  in  which  they  occur  at  a  time  when  the  lake 
extended  over  the  region  in  which  they  are  found. 
This  involves  the  conclusion  that  they  lived  and 


Ill 


LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION  79 


died  before  the  falls  had  cut  their  way  back 
through  the  gorge  of  Niagara  ;  and,  indeed,  it  has 
been  determined  that,  when  these  animals  lived,  the 
falls  of  Niagara  must  have  been  at  least  six  miles 
further  down  the  river  than  they  are  at  present. 
Many  computations  have  been  made  of  the  rate 
at  which  the  falls  are  thus  cutting  their  way  back. 
Those  computations  have  varied  greatly,  but  I 
believe  I  am  speaking  within  the  bounds  of 
prudence,  if  I  assume  that  the  falls  of  Niagara 
have  not  retreated  at  a  greater  pace  than  about 
a  foot  a  year.  Six  miles,  speaking  roughly,  are 
80,000  feet ;  30,000  feet,  at  a  foot  a  year,  gives 
80,000  years ;  and  thus  we  are  fairly  justified  in 
concluding  that  no  less  a  period  than  this  has 
passed  since  the  shell-fish,  whose  remains  are  left 
in  the  beds  to  which  I  have  referred,  were  living 
creatures. 

But  there  is  still  strong^er  evidence  of  the  lonor 
duration  of  certain  types.  I  have  already  stated 
that,  as  we  work  our  way  through  the  great  series 
of  the  Tertiary  formations,  we  find  many  species 
of  animals  identical  with  those  which  live  at  the 
present  day,  diminishing  in  numbers,  it  is  true, 
but  still  existing,  in  a  certain  proportion,  in  the 
oldest  of  the  Tertiary  rocks.  Furthermore,  when 
we  examine  the  rocks  of  the  Cretaceous  epoch, 
we  find  the  remains  of  some  animals  which  the 
closest  scrutiny  cannot  show  to  be,  in  any  im- 
portant respect,  different  from  those  which  live  at 


80  LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION  m 

the  present  time.  That  is  the  case  with  one  of 
the  cretaceous  lamp-shells  {Terehratula),  which 
has  continued  to  exist  unchanged,  or  with  insigni- 
ficant variations,  down  to  the  present  day.  Such 
is  the  case  with  the  Globigerince,  the  skeletons  of 
which,  aggregated  together,  form  a  large  propor- 
tion of  our  English  chalk.  Those  Glohigerince  can 
be  traced  down  to  the  Glohigerince  which  live  at 
the  surface  of  the  present  great  oceans,  and  the 
remains  of  which,  falling  to  the  bottom  of  the  sea, 
give  rise  to  a  chalky  mud.  Hence  it  must  be 
admitted  that  certain  existing  species  of  animals 
show  no  distinct  sign  of  modification,  or  trans- 
formation, in  the  course  of  a  lapse  of  time  as 
great  as  that  which  carries  us  back  to  the  Creta- 
ceous period ;  and  which,  whatever  its  absolute 
measure,  is  certainly  vastly  greater  than  thirty 
thousand  years. 

There  are  groups  of  species  so  closely  allied 
together,  that  it  needs  the  eye  of  a  naturalist  to 
distinguish  them  one  from  another.  If  we  dis- 
regard the  small  differences  which  separate  these 
forms,  and  consider  all  the  species  of  such  groups 
as  modifications  of  one  type,  we  shall  find  that, 
even  among  the  higher  animals,  some  types  have 
had  a  marvellous  duration.  In  the  chalk,  for 
example,  there  is  found  a  fish  belonging  to  the 
highest  and  the  most  differentiated  group  of 
osseous  fishes,  which  goes  by  the  name  of  Beryx. 
The  remains   of  that  fish  are  amonsj  the  most 


in 


LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  81 


beautiful  and  well-preserved  of  the  fossils  found 
in  our  English  chalk.  It  can  be  studied  anatomi- 
cally, so  far  as  the  hard  parts  are  concerned, 
almost  as  well  as  if  it  were  a  recent  fish.  But 
the  genus  Beryx  is  represented,  at  the  present 
day,  by  very  closely  allied  species  which  are  living 
in  the  Pacific  and  Atlantic  Oceans.  We  may  go 
still  farther  back.  I  have  already  referred  to  the 
fact,  that  the  Carboniferous  formations,  in  Europe 
and  in  America,  contain  the  remains  of  scorpions 
in  an  admirable  state  of  preservation,  and  that 
those  scorpions  are  hardly  distinguishable  from 
such  as  now  live.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  they 
are  not  different,  but  close  scrutiny  is  needed  in 
order  to  distinguish  them  from  modern  scorpions. 

More  than  this.  At  the  very  bottom  of  the 
Silurian  series,  in  beds  which  are  by  some  authori- 
ties referred  to  the  Cambrian  formation,  where  the 
signs  of  life  begin  to  fail  us — even  there,  among 
the  few  and  scanty  animal  remains  which  are 
discoverable,  we  find  species  of  molluscous  animals 
which  are  so  closely  allied  to  existing  forms  that, 
at  one  time,  they  were  grouped  under  the  same 
generic  name.  I  refer  to  the  well-known  Lingida 
of  the  Lingida  flags,  lately,  in  consequence  of 
some  slight  differences,  placed  in  the  new  genus 
Linrjiddla.  Practically,  it  belongs  to  the  same 
great  generic  group  as  the  Lingida,  which  is  to  be 
found  at  the  present  day  upon  your  own  shores 
and  those  of  many  other  parts  of  the  world. 

95 


82  LECTURES  ON    EVOLUTION  m 

The  same  truth  is  exemplified  if  we  turn  to 
certain  great  periods  of  the  earth's  history — as, 
for  example,  the  Mesozoic  epoch.  There  are 
groups  of  reptiles,  such  as  the  IcMliyosauria  and 
the  Flesiosauria,  which  appear  shortly  after  the 
commencement  of  this  epoch,  and  they  occur  in 
vast  numbers.  They  disappear  with  the  chalk 
and,  throughout  the  whole  of  the  great  series  of 
Mesozoic  rocks,  they  present  no  such  modifications 
as  can  safely  be  considered  evidence  of  progressive 
modification. 

Facts  of  this  kind  are  undoubtedly  fatal  to  any 
form  of  the  doctrine  of  evolution  which  postulates 
the  supposition  that  there  is  an  intrinsic  necessity, 
on  the  part  of  animal  forms  which  have  once 
come  into  existence,  to  undergo  continual  modifi- 
cation ;  and  they  are  as  distinctly  opposed  to  any 
view  which  involves  the  belief,  that  such  modifi- 
cation as  may  occur,  must  take  place,  at  the  same 
rate,  in  all  the  different  types  of  animal  or 
vegetable  life.  The  facts,  as  I  have  placed  them 
before  you,  obviously  directly  contradict  any  form 
of  the  hypothesis  of  evolution  which  stands  in  need 
of  these  two  postulates. 

But,  one  great  service  that  has  been  rendered 
by  Mr.  Darwin  to  the  doctrine  of  evolution  in 
general  is  this :  he  has  shown  that  there  are  two 
chief  factors  in  the  process  of  evolution :  one  of 
them  is  the  tendency  to  vary,  the  existence  of 
which    in  all  living   forms  may  be   proved  by 


in  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  83 

observation ;  the  other  is  the  influence  of  sur- 
rounding conditions  upon  what  I  may  call  the 
parent  form  and  the  variations  which  are  thus 
evolved  from  it.  The  cause  of  the  production  of 
variations  is  a  matter  not  at  all  properly  under- 
stood at  present.  Whether  variation  depends 
upon  some  intricate  machinery — if  I  may  use  the 
phrase — of  the  living  organism  itself,  or  whether 
it  arises  through  the  influence  of  conditions  upon 
that  form,  is  not  certain,  and  the  question  may, 
for  the  present,  be  left  open.  But  the  important 
point  is  that,  granting  the  existence  of  the  ten- 
dency to  the  production  of  variations ;  then, 
whether  the  variations  which  are  produced  shall 
survive  and  supplant  the  parent,  or  whether  the 
parent  form  shall  survive  and  supplant  the  varia- 
tions, is  a  matter  which  depends  entirely  on  those 
conditions  which  give  rise  to  the  struggle  for 
existence.  If  the  surrounding  conditions  are  such 
that  the  parent  form  is  more  competent  to  deal 
with  them,  and  flourish  in  them  than  the  derived 
forms,  then,  in  the  struggle  for  existence,  the  parent 
form  will  maintain  itself  and  the  derived  forms 
will  be  exterminated.  But  if,  on  the  contrary, 
the  conditions  are  such  as  to  be  more  favourable 
to  a  derived  than  to  the  parent  form,  the  parent 
form  will  be  extirpated  and  the  derived  form 
will  take  its  place.  In  the  first  case,  there  will  be 
no  progression,  no  change  of  structure,  through 
any  imaginable  series  of  ages ;  in  the  second  place 


84  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  m 

there  will  be  modification  of  change  and 
form. 

Thus  the  existence  of  these  persistent  types,  as 
I  have  termed  them,  is  no  real  obstacle  in  the  way 
of  the  theory  of  evolution.  Take  the  case  of  the 
scorpions  to  which  I  have  just  referred.  No 
doubt,  since  the  Carboniferous  epoch,  conditions 
have  always  obtained,  such  as  existed  when  the 
scorpions  of  that  epoch  flourished  ;  conditions  in 
which  scorpions  find  themselves  better  oj0f,  more 
competent  to  deal  with  the  difficulties  in  their  way, 
than  any  variation  from  the  scorpion  type  which  they 
may  have  produced;  and,  for  that  reason,  the  scorpion 
type  has  persisted,  and  has  not  been  supplanted  by 
any  other  form.  And  there  is  no  reason,  in  the 
nature  of  things,  why,  as  long  as  this  world  exists,  if 
there  be  conditions  more  favourable  to  scorpions 
than  to  any  variation  which  may  arise  from  them, 
these  forms  of  life  should  not  persist. 

Therefore,  the  stock  objection  to  the  hypothesis 
of  evolution,  based  on  the  long  duration  of  certain 
animal  and  vegetable  types,  is  no  objection  at  all. 
The  facts  of  this  character — and  they  are  numer- 
ous— belong  to  that  class  of  evidence  which  I  have 
called  indifferent.  That  is  to  say,  they  may  afford 
no  direct  support  to  the  doctrine  of  evolution,  but 
they  are  capable  of  being  interpreted  in  perfect 
consistency  with  it. 

There  is  another  order  of  facts  belonging  to  the 
class   of  negative   or   indifferent   evidence.     The 


ni  LECTURES  ON    EVOLUTION  85 

great  group  of  Lizards,  which  abound  in  the 
present  world,  extends  through  the  whole  series 
of  formations  as  far  back  as  the  Permian,  or  latest 
Palaeozoic,  epoch.  These  Permian  lizards  differ 
astonishingly  little  from  the  lizards  which  exist 
at  the  present  day.  Comparing  the  amount  of 
the  differences  between  them  and  modem  lizards, 
with  the  prodigious  lapse  of  time  between  the 
Permian  epoch  and  the  present  age,  it  may  be 
said  that  the  amount  of  change  is  insignificant. 
But,  when  we  carry  our  researches  farther  back 
in  time,  we  find  no  trace  of  lizards,  nor  of  any 
true  reptile  whatever,  in  the  whole  mass  of  for- 
mations beneath  the  Permian. 

Now,  it  is  perfectly  clear  that  if  our  pala^onto- 
logical  collections  are  to  be  taken,  even  approxi- 
mately, as  an  adequate  representation  of  all  the 
forms  of  animals  and  plants  that  have  ever  lived ; 
and  if  the  record  furnished  by  the  known  series 
of  beds  of  stratified  rock  covers  the  whole  series 
of  events  which  constitute  the  history  of  life  on 
the  globe,  such  a  fact  as  this  directly  contravenes 
the  hypothesis  of  evolution ;  because  this  hypo- 
thesis postulates  that  the  existence  of  every  form 
must  have  been  preceded  by  that  of  some  form 
little  different  from  it.  Here,  however,  we  have 
to  take  into  consideration  that  important  truth 
so  well  insisted  upon  by  Lyell  and  by  Darwin — 
the  imperfection  of  the  geological  record.  It  can 
be  demonstrated  that  the  geological  record  must 


86  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  ill 

be  incomplete,  that  it  can  only  preserve  remains 
found  in  certain  favourable  localities  and  under 
particular  conditions;  that  it  must  be  destroyed 
by  processes  of  denudation,  and  obliterated  by 
processes  of  metamorphosis.  Beds  of  rock  of  any 
thickness,  crammed  full  of  organic  remains,  may 
yet,  either  by  the  percolation  of  water  through 
them,  or  by  the  influence  of  subterranean  heat, 
lose  all  trace  of  these  remains,  and  present  the 
appearance  of  beds  of  rock  formed  under  con- 
ditions in  which  living  forms  were  absent.  Such 
metamorphic  rocks  occur  in  formations  of  all  ages; 
and,  in  various  cases,  there  are  very  good  grounds 
for  the  belief  that  they  have  contained  organic 
remains,  and  that  those  remains  have  been  abso- 
lutely obliterated. 

I  insist  upon  the  defects  of  the  geological  re- 
cord the  more  because  those  who  have  not 
attended  to  these  matters  are  apt  to  say,  *'  It  is 
all  very  well,  but,  when  you  get  into  a  difficulty 
with  your  theory  of  evolution,  you  appeal  to  the 
incompleteness  and  the  imperfection  of  the  geo- 
logical record ; "  and  I  want  to  make  it  perfectly 
clear  to  you  that  this  imperfection  is  a  great  fact, 
which  must  be  taken  into  account  in  all  our 
speculations,  or  we  shall  constantly  be  going 
wrong. 

You  see  the  singular  series  of  footmarks,  drawn 
of  its  natural  size  in  the  large  diagram  hanging 
up  here   (Fig.  2),  which  I  owe  to  the  kindness 


Ill  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  87 

of  my  friend  Professor  Marsh,  with  whom  I  had 
the  opportunity  recently  of  visiting  the  precise 
locaUty  in  Massachusetts  in  which  these  tracks 
occur.  I  am,  therefore,  able  to  give  you  my  own 
testimony,  if  needed,  that  the  diagram  accurately 
represents  what  we  saw.  The  valley  of  the  Con- 
necticut is  classical  ground  for  the  geologist.  It 
contains  great  beds  of  sandstone,  covering  many 
square  miles,  which  have  evidently  formed  a  part 
of  an  ancient  sea-shore,  or,  it  may  be,  lake-shore. 
For  a  certain  period  of  time  after  their  deposition, 
these    beds    have    remained    sufficiently   soft   to 


Fig.  2. — Tracks  of  Beontozoum. 

receive  the  impressions  of  the  feet  of  whatever 
animals  walked  over  them,  and  to  preserve  them 
afterwards,  in  exactly  the  same  way  as  such  im- 
pressions are  at  this  hour  preserved  on  the  shores 
of  the  Bay  of  Fundy  and  elsewhere.  The  dia- 
gram represents  the  track  of  some  gigantic 
animal,  which  walked  on  its  hind  legs.  You  see 
the  series  of  marks  made  alternately  by  the  right 
and  by  the  left  foot ;  so  that,  from  one  impression 
to  the  other  of  the  three-toed  foot  on  the  same 
side,  is  one  stride,  and  that  stride,  as  we  mea- 


88  LECTUEES   ON  EVOLUTION  ill 

sured  it,  is  six  feet  nine  inches.  I  leave  you, 
therefore,  to  form  an  impression  of  the  magni- 
tude of  the  creature  which,  as  it  walked  along 
the  ancient  shore,  made  these  impressions. 

Of  such  impressions  there  are  untold  thousands 
upon  these  sandstones.  Fifty  or  sixty  different 
kinds  have  been  discovered,  and  they  cover  vast 
areas.  But,  up  to  this  present  time,  not  a  bone, 
not  a  fragment,  of  any  one  of  the  animals  which 
left  these  great  footmarks  has  been  found  ;  in 
fact,  the  only  animal  remains  which  have  been 
met  with  in  all  these  deposits,  from  the  time  of 
their  discovery  to  the  present  day — though  they 
have  been  carefully  hunted  over — is  a  fragmentary 
skeleton  of  one  of  the  smaller  forms.  What  has 
become  of  the  bones  of  all  these  animals  ?  You 
see  we  are  not  dealing  with  little  creatures,  but 
with  animals  that  make  a  step  of  six  feet  nine 
inches ;  and  their  remains  must  have  been  left 
somewhere.  The  probability  is,  that  they  have 
been  dissolved  away,  and  completely  lost. 

I  have  had  occasion  to  work  out  the  nature  of 
fossil  remains,  of  which  there  was  nothing  left 
except  casts  of  the  bones,  the  solid  material  of  the 
skeleton  having  been  dissolved  out  by  percolating 
water.  It  was  a  chance,  in  this  case,  that  the 
sandstone  happened  to  be  of  such  a  constitution 
as  to  set,  and  to  allow  the  bones  to  be  afterward 
dissolved  out,  leaving  cavities  of  the  exact  shape 
of  the  bones.     Had  that  constitution  been  other 


Ill  LECTURES   ON    EVOLUTION  89 

than  what  it  was,  the  bones  would  have  been 
dissolved,  the  layers  of  sandstone  would  have 
fallen  together  into  one  mass,  and  not  the 
slightest  indication  that  the  animal  had  existed 
would  have  been  discoverable. 

I  know  of  no  more  striking  evidence  than  these 
facts  afford,  of  the  caution  which  should  be  used 
in  drawing  the  conclusion,  from  the  absence  of 
organic  remains  in  a  deposit,  that  animals  or 
plants  did  not  exist  at  the  time  it  was  formed.  I 
believe  that,  with  a  right  understanding  of  the 
doctrine  of  evolution  on  the  one  hand,  and  a  just 
estimation  of  the  importance  of  the  imperfection 
of  the  geological  record  on  the  other,  all  difficulty 
is  removed  from  the  kind  of  evidence  to  which  I 
have  adverted  ;  and  that  we  are  justified  in 
believing  that  all  such  cases  are  examples  of  what 
I  have  designated  negative  or  indifferent  evidence 
— that  is  to  say,  they  in  no  way  directly  advance 
the  hypothesis  of  evolution,  but  they  are  not  to  be 
regarded  as  obstacles  in  the  way  of  our  belief  in 
that  doctrine. 

I  now  pass  on  to  the  consideration  of  those 
cases  which,  for  reasons  which  I  will  point  out  to 
you  by  and  by,  are  not  to  be  regarded  as  demon- 
strative of  the  truth  of  evolution,  but  which  are 
such  as  must  exist  if  evolution  be  true,  and  which 
therefore  are,  upon  the  whole,  evidence  in  favour 
of  the  doctrine.  If  the  doctrine  of  evolution  be 
true,  it  follows,  that,  however  diverse  the  different 


90  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  m 

groups  of  animals  and  of  plants  may  be,  they 
must  all,  at  one  time  or  other,  have  been  con- 
nected by  gradational  forms ;  so  that,  from  the 
highest  animals,  whatever  they  may  be,  down  to 
the  lowest  speck  of  protoplasmic  matter  in  which 
life  can  be  manifested,  a  series  of  gradations, 
leading  from  one  end  of  the  series  to  the  other, 
either  exists  or  has  existed.  Undoubtedly  that  is 
a  necessary  postulate  of  the  doctrine  of  evolution. 
But  when  we  look  upon  living  Nature  as  it  is,  we 
find  a  totally  different  state  of  things.  We  find 
that  animals  and  plants  fall  into  groups,  the 
different  members  of  which  are  pretty  closely 
allied  together,  but  which  are  separated  by 
definite,  larger  or  smaller,  breaks,  from  other 
groups.  In  other  words,  no  intermediate  forms 
v/hich  bridge  over  these  gaps  or  intervals  are,  at 
present,  to  be  met  with. 

To  illustrate  what  I  mean  :  Let  me  call  your 
attention  to  those  vertebrate  animals  which  are 
most  familiar  to  you,  such  as  mammals,  birds,  and 
reptiles.  At  the  present  day,  these  groups  of 
animals  are  perfectly  well-defined  from  one 
another.  We  know  of  no  animal  now  living 
which,  in  any  sense,  is  intermediate  between  the 
mammal  and  the  bird,  or  between  the  bird  and 
the  reptile ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  there  are  many 
very  distinct  anatomical  peculiarities,  well-defined 
marks,  by  which  the  mammal  is  separated  from 
the  bird,  and  the   bird   from   the  reptile.     The 


Ill  LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION"  91 

distinctions  are  obvious  and  striking  if  you  com- 
pare the  definitions  of  these  great  groups  as  they 
now  exist. 

The  same  may  be  said  of  many  of  the  sub- 
ordinate groups,  or  orders,  into  which  these  great 
classes  are  divided.  At  the  present  time,  for 
example,  there  are  numerous  forms  of  non-rumin- 
ant pachyderms,  or  what  we  may  call  broadly, 
the  pig  tribe,  and  many  varieties  of  ruminants. 
These  latter  have  their  definite  characteristics, 
and  the  former  have  their  distinguishing  peculi- 
arities. But  there  is  nothing  that  fills  up  the  gap 
between  the  ruminants  and  the  pig  tribe.  The 
two  are  distinct.  Such  also  is  the  case  in  respect 
of  the  minor  groups  of  the  class  of  reptiles.  The 
existing  fauna  shows  us  crocodiles,  lizards,  snakes, 
and  tortoises ;  but  no  connecting  link  between  the 
crocodile  and  lizard,  nor  between  the  lizard  and 
snake,  nor  between  the  snake  and  the  crocodile, 
nor  between  any  two  of  these  groups.  They  are 
separated  by  absolute  breaks.  If,  then,  it  could 
be  shown  that  this  state  of  things  had  always 
existed,  the  fact  would  be  fatal  to  the  doctrine  of 
evolution.  If  the  intermediate  gradations,  which 
the  doctrine  of  evolution  requires  to  have  existed 
between  these  groups,  are  not  to  be  found  a.ny- 
where  in  the  records  of  the  past  history  of  the 
globe,  their  absence  is  a  strong  and  weighty 
negative  argument  against  evolution ;  while,  on 
the  other  hand,  if  such  intermediate  forms  are  to 


02  LECTUEES  ON  EVOLUTION  m 

be  found,  that  is  so  much  to  the  good  of  evoki- 
tion ;  although  for  reasons  which  I  will  lay  before 
you  by  and  by,  we  must  be  cautious  m  our 
estimate  of  the  evidential  cogency  of  facts  of  this 
kind. 

It  is  a  very  remarkable  circumstance  that,  from 
the  commencement  of  the  serious  study  of  fossil 
remains,  in  fact,  from  the  time  when  Cuvier 
began  his  brilliant  researches  upon  those  found  in 
the  quarries  of  Montmartre,  palaeontology  has 
shown  what  she  was  going  to  do  in  this  matter, 
and  what  kind  of  evidence  it  lay  in  her  power  to 
produce. 

I  said  just  now  that,  in  the  existing  Fauna,  the 
group  of  pig-like  animals  and  the  group  of  rumi- 
nants are  entirely  distinct ;  but  one  of  the  first  of 
Cuvier's  discoveries  was  an  animal  which  he 
called  the  Ano2Jlotherm77i,  and  which  proved  to 
be,  in  a  great  many  important  respects,  inter- 
mediate in  character  between  the  pigs,  on  the  one 
hand,  and  the  ruminants  on  the  other.  Thus, 
research  into  the  history  of  the  past  did,  to  a 
certain  extent,  tend  to  fill  up  the  breach  between 
the  group  of  ruminants  and  the  group  of  pigs. 
Another  remarkable  animal  restored  by  the  great 
French  palaeontologist,  the  Palceotherium,  similarly 
tended  to  connect  together  animals  to  all  appear- 
ance so  different  as  the  rhinoceros,  the  horse,  and 
the  tapir.  Subsequent  research  has  brought  to 
light  multitudes  of  facts  of  the  same  order ;  and, 


in  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  93 

at  tlie  present  day,  the  investigations  of  such 
anatomists  as  Rutimeyer  and  Gaudry  have  tended 
to  fill  up,  more  and  more,  the  gaps  in  our  existing 
series  of  mammals,  and  to  connect  groups  former- 
ly thought  to  be  distinct. 

But  I  think  it  may  have  an  especial  interest  if, 
instead  of  dealing  with  these  examples,  which  would 
require  a  great  deal  of  tedious  osteological  detail, 
I  take  the  case  of  birds  and  reptiles ;  groups  which, 
at  the  present  day,  are  so  clearly  distinguished  from 
one  another  that  there  are  perhaps  no  classes  of 
animals  which,  in  popular  apprehension,  are  more 
completely  separated.  Existing  birds,  as  you  are 
aware,  are  covered  with  feathers ;  their  anterior 
extremities,  specially  and  peculiarly  modified,  are 
converted  into  wings,  by  the  aid  of  which  most  of 
them  are  able  to  fly ;  they  walk  upright  upon  two 
legs ;  and  these  limbs,  when  they  are  considered 
anatomically,  present  a  great  number  of  exceeding- 
ly remarkable  peculiarities,  to  which  I  may  have 
occasion  to  advert  incidentally  as  I  go  on,  and 
which  are  not  met  with,  even  approximately,  in 
any  existing  forms  of  reptiles.  On  the  other  hand, 
existing  reptiles  have  no  feathers.  They  may  have 
naked  skins,  or  be  covered  with  horny  scales,  or 
bony  plates,  or  with  both.  They  possess  no  wings ; 
they  neither  fly  by  means  of  their  fore-limbs,  nor 
habitually  walk  upright  upon  their  hind-limbs  ; 
and  the  bones  of  their  legs  present  no  such  modifi- 
cations as  we  find  in  birds.     It  is  impossible  to 


94  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  iii 

imagine  any  two  groups  more  definitely  and  dis- 
tinctly separated,  notwithstanding  certain  charac- 
ters which  they  possess  in  common. 

As  we  trace  the  history  of  birds  ba.ck  in  time,  we 
find  their  remains,  sometimes  in  great  abundance, 
throughout  the  whole  extent  of  the  tertiary  rocks  ; 
but,  so  far  as  our  present  knowledge  goes,  the  birds 
of  the  tertiary  rocks  retain  the  same  essential  char- 
acters as  the  birds  of  the  present  day.  In  other 
words,  the  tertiary  birds  come  within  the  definition 
of  the  class  constituted  by  existing  birds,  and  are  as 
much  separated  from  reptiles  as  existing  birds  are. 
Not  very  long  ago  no  remains  of  birds  had  been 
found  below  the  tertiary  rocks,  and  I  am  not  sure 
but  that  some  persons  were  prepared  to  demonstrate 
that  they  could  not  have  existed  at  an  earlier  period. 
But,  in  the  course  of  the  last  few  years,  such  remains 
have  been  discovered  in  England ;  though,  unfortu- 
nately, in  so  imperfect  and  fragmentary  a  condition, 
that  it  is  impossible  to  say  whether  they  differed 
from  existing  birds  in  any  essential  character  or  not. 
In  your  country  the  development  of  the  cretaceous 
series  of  rocks  is  enormous ;  the  conditions  under 
which  the  later  cretaceous  strata  have  been  de- 
posited are  highly  favourable  to  the  preservation  of 
organic  remains ;  and  the  researches,  full  of  labour 
and  risk,  which  have  been  carried  on  by  Professor 
Marsh  in  these  cretaceous  rocks  of  Western 
America,  have  rewarded  him  with  the  discovery  of 
forms  of  birds  of  which  we  had  hitherto  no  concep- 


Ill  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  95 

tion.  By  his  kindness,  I  am  enabled  to  place 
before  you  a  restoration  of  one  of  these  extraor- 
dinary birds,  every  part  of  which  can  be  thoroughly 
justified  by  the  more  or  less  complete  skeletons,  in 
a  very  perfect  state  of  preservation,  which  he  has 
discovered.  This  HcsperoTnis  (Fig.  3),  which 
measured  between  five  and  six  feet  in  length,  is 
astonishingly  like  our  existing  divers  or  grebes  in  a 
great  many  respects  ;  so  like  them  indeed  that, 
had  the  skeleton  of  Ilesperornis  been  found  in  a 
museum  without  its  skull,  it  probably  would  have 
been  j)laced  in  the  same  group  of  birds  as  the 
divers  and  grebes  of  the  joresent  day.  ^  But 
Ecspcrornis  differs  from  all  existing  bir '  •,  and  so 
far  resembles  reptiles,  in  one  important  particular 
— it  is  provided  with  teeth.  The  long  jaws  are 
armed  with  teeth  which  have  curved  crowns  and 
thick  roots  (Fig.  4),  and  are  not  set  in  distinct 
sockets,  but  are  lodged  in  a  groove.  In  possessing 
true  teeth,  the  Hesperornis  differs  from  every  ex- 
isting bird,  and  from  every  bird  yet  discovered  in 
the  tertiary  formations,  the  tooth -like  serrations  of 
the  jaws  in  the  Odontcptcryx  of  the  London  clay 
being  mere  processes  of  the  bony  substance  of  the 
jaws,  and  not  teeth  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word. 
Itt  view  of  the  characteristics  of  this  bird  we  are 

^  The  absence  of  any  keel  on  the  breast-hone  and  some  other 
osteological  ])eculiarities,  observed  by  Professor  Marsh,  however, 
suggest  that  Hesperornis  may  be  a  modification  of  a  less 
specialised  group  of  birds  than  that  to  which  these  existing 
ac^uatic  birds  belong. 


96  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  m 

therefore  obliged  to  modify  the  definitions  of  the 
classes  of  birds  and  reptiles.     Before  the  discovery 


Fig.  3. — Hesperoenis  regalis  (Marsli), 

of  Hesperornis,  the  definition   of  the  class  Aves 
based  upon  our  knowledge  of  existing  birds  might 


I'l: 


Fia.  4.— Hesperoenis  regaxis  (Marsh). 
(Side  and  upper  views  of  half  the  lower  jaw  ;   side  and  end  views  of 


96 


vertebra  and  a  separate  tooth.) 


98  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  HI 

have  been  extended  to  all  birds  ;  it  might  have  been 
said  that  the  absence  of  teeth  was  characteristic 
of  the  class  of  birds ;  but  the  discovery  of  an 
animal  which,  in  every  part  of  its  skeleton,  closely 
agrees  with  existing  birds,  and  yet  possesses  teeth, 
shows  that  there  were  ancient  birds  which,  in 
respect  of  possessing  teeth,  approached  reptiles 
more  nearly  than  any  existing  bird  does,  and,  to 
that  extent,  diminishes  the  liiatus  between  the  two 
classes. 

The  same  formation  has  yielded  another  bird 
IcJithyornis  (Fig.  5),  which  also  possesses  teeth  ; 
but  the  teeth  are  situated  in  distinct  sockets,  while 
those  of  Hesperornis  are  not  so  lodged.  The  lat- 
ter also  has  such  very  small,  almost  rudimentary 
wings,  that  it  must  have  been  chiefly  a  swimmer 
and  a  diver  like  a  Penguin ;  while  Ichthyornis  has 
strong  wings  and  no  doubt  possessed  correspond- 
ing powers  of  flight.  Ichthyornis  also  differed  in 
the  fact  that  its  vertebrae  have  not  the  peculiar 
characters  of  the  vertebrae  of  existing  and  of  all 
known  tertiary  birds,  but  were  concave  at  each 
end.  This  discovery  leads  us  to  make  a  further 
modification  in  the  definition  of  the  group  of 
birds,  and  to  part  with  another  of  the  characters 
by  which  almost  all  existing  birds  are  distinguished 
from  reptiles. 

Apart  from  the  few  fragmentary  remains  from 
the  English  greensand,  to  which  I  have  referred, 
the   Mesozoic   rocks,   older  than  those  in  which 


i:^ 


M\ 


Fio.  5.— IcHTHTORNis  DispAR  (Marsh). 

(Side  and  upper  views  of  half  the  lower  jaw;  and  side  ard  end  views  of  a 
vertebra.) 


100  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  m 

Hes^pcrornis  and  Ichthyornis  have  been  discovered 
have  afforded  no  certain  evidence  of  birds,  with 
the  remarkable  exception  of  the  Solenhofen  slates. 
These  so-called  slates  are  composed  of  a  fine 
gramed  calcareous  mud  which  has  hardened  into 
lithographic  stone,  and  in  which  organic  remains 
are  almost  as  well  preserved  as  they  would  be  if 
they  had  been  imbedded  in  so  much  plaster  of 
Paris.  They  have  yielded  the  Archceopteryx,  the 
existence  of  which  was  first  made  known  by  the 
finding  of  a  fossil  feather,  or  rather  of  the  impres- 
sion of  one.  It  is  wonderful  enough  that  such  a 
perishable  thing  as  a  feather,  and  nothing  more, 
should  be  discovered ;  yet,  for  a  long  time,  nothing 
was  known  of  this  bird  except  its  feather.  But 
by  and  by  a  solitary  skeleton  was  discovered  which 
is  now  in  the  British  Museum.  The  skull  of  this 
solitary  specimen  is  unfortunately  wanting,  and  it 
is  therefore  uncertain  whether  the  Archcco'pUryx 
possessed  teeth  or  not.^  But  the  remainder  of  the 
skeleton  is  so  well  preserved  as  to  leave  no  doubt 
respecting  the  main  features  of  the  animal,  which 
are  very  singular.  The  feet  are  not  only  alto- 
gether bird-like,  but  have  the  special  characters  of 
the  feet  of  perching  birds,  while  the  body  had  a 
clothing  of  true  feathers.  Nevertheless,  in  some 
other  respects,  Archwopteryx  is  unlike  a  bird  and 
like  a  reptile.     There  is  a  long  tail  composed  of 

^  A  second  specimen,  discovered  in  1877,  and  at  present  in 
the  Berlin  museum,  shows  au  excellently  preserved  skull  with 
teeth  ;  and  three  digits,  all  terminated  by  claws,  iu  the  lore 
limb.     1893. 


Ill  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  101 

many  vertebrce.  The  structure  of  the  wing  differs 
in  some  very  remarkable  respects  from  that  which 
It  presents  in  a  true  bird.  In  the  latter,  the  end 
of  the  wino^  answers  to  the  thumb  and  two  finofers 
of  my  hand ;  but  the  metacarpal  bones,  or  those 
which  answer  to  the  bones  of  the  fingers  which  lie 
in  the  palm  of  the  hand,  are  fused  together  into 
one  mass ;  and  the  whole  apparatus,  except 
the  last  joints  of  the  thumb,  is  bound  up  in 
a  sheath  of  inteooiment,  while  the  edcfe  of  the 
hand  carries  the  principal  quill-feathers.  In  the 
Archccopteryx,  the  upper-arm  bone  is  like  that  of 
a  bird  ;  and  the  two  bones  of  the  forearm  are 
more  or  less  like  those  of  a  bird,  but  the  fino-ers 
are  not  bound  together — they  are  free.  What  their 
number  may  have  been  is  uncertain ;  but  several, 
if  not  all,  of  them  were  terminated  by  strong  curved 
claws,  not  like  such  as  are  sometimes  found  in 
birds,  but  such  as  reptiles  possess ;  so  that,  in 
the  Archceoptcryx,  we  have  an  animal  which, 
to  a  certain  extent,  occupies  a  midway  place 
between  a  bird  and  a  reptile.  It  is  a  bird  so 
far  as  its  foot  and  sundry  other  parts  of  its 
skeleton  are  concerned ;  it  is  essentially  and 
thoroughly  a  bird  by  its  feathers ;  but  it  is  much 
more  properly  a  reptile  in  the  fact  that  the 
region  which  represents  the  hand  has  separate 
bones,  with  claws  resembling  those  which  ter- 
minate the  fore-limb  of  a  reptile.  Moreover,  it 
had  a  long  reptile-like  tail  with  a  fringe  of 
feathers    on  each  side;    while,  in  all   true  birds 


102  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  m 

hitherto  known,  the  tail  is  relatively  short,  and 
the  vertebrae  which  constitute  its  skeleton  are 
generally  peculiarly  modified. 

Like  the  Anoplotherium  and  the  Pakeotheriicm, 
therefore,  Archceopteryx  tends  to  fill  up  the  interval 
between  groups  which,  in  the  existing  world,  are 
widely  separated,  and  to  destroy  the  value  of  the 
definitions  of  zoological  groups  based  upon  our 
knowledge  of  existing  forms.  And  such  cases  as 
these  constitute  evidence  in  favour  of  evolution, 
in  so  far  as  they  prove  that,  in  former  periods  of 
the  world's  history,  there  were  animals  which  over- 
stepped the  bounds  of  existing  groups,  and  tended 
to  merge  them  into  larger  assemblages.  They 
show  that  animal  organisation  is  more  flexible  than 
our  knowledge  of  recent  forms  might  have  led 
us  to  believe ;  and  that  many  structural  permuta- 
tions and  combinations,  of  which  the  present 
world  gives  us  no  indication,  may  nevertheless 
have  existed. 

But  it  by  no  means  follows,  because  the  Palceo- 
thcrium  has  much  in  common  with  the  horse,  on 
the  one  hand,  and  with  the  rhinoceros  on  the 
other,  that  it  is  the  intermediate  form  through 
which  rhinoceroses  have  passed  to  become  horses, 
or  vice  versa  ;  on  the  contrary,  any  such  supposition 
would  certainly  be  erroneous.  Nor  do  I  think  it 
likely  that  the  transition  from  the  reptile  to  the 
bird  has  been  effected  by  such  a  form  as  Archce- 
o'pUryx.  And  it  is  convenient  to  distinguish  these 
intermediate  forms  between  two  groups,  which  do 


in  LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION  103 

not  represent  the  actual  passage  from  the  one 
group  to  the  other,  as  intercalary  types,  from  those 
linear  types  which,  more  or  less  approximately,  indi- 
cate the  nature  of  the  steps  by  which  the  transition 
from  one  group  to  the  other  was  effected. 

I  conceive  that  such  linear  forms,  constituting  a 
series  of  natural  gradations  between  the  reptile 
and  the  bird,  and  enabling  us  to  understand  the 
manner  in  which  the  reptilian  has  been  metamor- 
phosed into  the  bird  type,  are  really  to  be  found 
among  a  group  of  ancient  and  extinct  terrestrial 
reptiles  known  as  the  Ornithoscelida.  The  re- 
mains of  these  animals  occur  throughout  the  series 
of  mesozoic  formations,  from  the  Trias  to  the  Chalk, 
and  there  are  indications  of  their  existence  even  in 
the  later  Palaeozoic  strata. 

Most  of  these  reptiles,  at  present  known,  are  of 
great  size,  some  having  attained  a  length  of  forty 
feet  or  perhaps  more.  The  majority  resembled 
lizards  and  crocodiles  in  their  general  form,  and 
many  of  them  were,  like  crocodiles,  protected  by 
an  armour  of  heavy  bony  plates.  But,  in  others, 
the  hind  limbs  elongate  and  the  fore  limbs  shorten, 
until  their  relative  proportions  approach  those 
which  are  observed  in  the  short-winged,  flightless, 
ostrich  tribe  among  birds. 

The  skull  is  relatively  light,  and  in  some  cases 
the  jaws,  though  bearing  teeth,  are  beak -like  at 
their  extremities  and  appear  to  have  been  enveloped 
in  a  horny  sheath.  In  the  part  of  the  vertebral 
column  which  lies  between  the  haunch  bones  and 


104  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  III 

is  called  the  sacrum,  a  number  of  vertebrog  may- 
unite  together  into  one  whole,  and  in  this  respect, 
as  in  some  details  of  its  structure,  the  sacrum  of 
these  reptiles  approaches  that  of  birds. 

But  it  is  in  the  structure  of  the  pelvis  and  of 
the  hind  limb  that  some  of  these  ancient  reptiles 
present  the  most  remarkable  approximation  to 
birds,  and  clearly  indicate  the  way  by  which  the 
most  specialised  and  characteristic  features  of  the 
bird  may  have  been  evolved  from  the  corre- 
sponding parts  in  the  reptile. 

In  Fig.  6,  the  pelvis  and  hind  limbs  of  a  croco- 
dile, a  three-toed  bird,  and  an  ornithoscelidan  are 
represented  side  by  side ;  and,  for  facility  of  com- 
parison, in  corresponding  positions ;  but  it  must  be 
recollected  that,  while  the  position  of  the  bird's 
limb  is  natural,  that  of  the  crocodile  is  not  so.  In 
the  bird,  the  thigh-bone  lies  close  to  the  body, 
and  the  metatarsal  bones  of  the  foot  (ii.,  iii.,  iv., 
Fig.  6)  are,  ordinarily,  raised  into  a  more  or  less 
vertical  position ;  in  the  crocodile,  the  thigh-bone 
stands  out  at  an  angle  from  the  body,  and  the 
metatarsal  bones  (i.,  ii.,  iii.,  iv..  Fig.  6)  lie  flat 
on  the  ground.  Hence,  in  the  crocodile,  the  body 
usually  lies  squat  between  the  legs,  while,  in  the 
bird,  it  is  raised  upon  the  hind  legs,  as  upon 
pillars. 

In  the  crocodile,  the  pelvis  is  obviously  com- 
posed of  three  bones  on  each  side  :  the  ilium  (//.), 
the  Pubis  (Ph.),  and  the  ischium  (Is.).  In  the 
adult  bird  there  appears  to  be  but  one  bone  on 


ni  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  105 

each  side.  The  examination  of  the  pelvis  of  a 
chick,  liowever,  shows  that  each  half  is  made  up 
of  three  bones,  which  answer  to  those  which  re- 
main distinct  throughout  life  in  the  crocodile. 
There  is,  therefore,  a  fundamental  identity  of  plan 
in  the  construction  of  the  pelvis  of  both  bird  and 
re^jtile;  though  the  difference  in  form,  relative 
size,  and  direction  of  the  corresponding  bones  in 
the  two  cases  are  very  great. 

But  the  most  striking  contrast  between  the 
two  lies  in  the  bones  of  the  leg  and  of  that  part  of 
the  foot  termed  the  tarsus,  which  follows  upon  the 
leg.  In  the  crocodile,  the  fibula  {F)  is  relatively 
large  and  its  lower  end  is  complete.  The  tibia  {T) 
has  no  marked  crest  at  its  upper  end,  and  its  lower 
end  is  narrow  and  not  pulley-shaped.  There  are 
two  rows  of  separate  tarsal  bones  {As.,  Ca.,  &c.) 
and  four  distinct  metatarsal  bones,  with  a  rudiment 
of  a  fifth. 

In  the  bird,  the  fibula  is  small  and  its  lower  end 
diminishes  to  a  point.  The  tibia  has  a  strong 
crest  at  its  upper  end  and  its  lower  extremity 
passes  into  a  broad  pulley.  There  seem  at  first  to 
be  no  tarsal  bones ;  and  only  one  bone,  divided  at 
the  end  into  three  heads  for  the  three  toes  which 
are  attached  to  it,  appears  in  the  place  of  the 
metatarsus. 

In  a  young  bird,  however,  the  pulley-shaped 
apparent  end  of  the  tibia  is  a  distinct  bone,  which 
represents  the  bones  marked  As.,  Ca.,  in  the  croco- 
dile ;  while  the  apparently  single  metatarsal  bone 


106  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  m 

consists  of  three  bones,  wliicli  early  unite  with  one 
another  and  with  an  additional  bone,  which  repre- 
sents the  lower  row  of  bones  in  the  tarsus  of  the 
crocodile. 

In  other  words,  it  can  be  shown  by  the  study  of 
development  that  the  bird's  pelvis  and  hind  limb 
are  simply  extreme  modifications  of  the  same  fun- 
damental plan  as  that  upon  which  these  parts  are 
modelled  in  reptiles. 

On  comparing  the  pelvis  and  hind  limb  of  the 
ornithoscelidan  with  that  of  the  crocodile,  on  the 
one  side,  and  that  of  the  bird,  on  the  other  (Fig.  6), 
it  is  obvious  that  it  represents  a  middle  term  be- 
tween the  two.  The  pelvic  bones  approach  the 
form  of  those  of  the  birds,  and  the  direction  of  the 
pubis  and  ischium  is  nearly  that  which  is  charac- 
teristic of  birds ;  the  thigh  bone,  from  the  direction 
of  its  head,  must  have  lain  close  to  the  body ;  the 
tibia  has  a  great  crest ;  and,  immovably  fitted  on 
to  its  lower  end,  there  is  a  pulley-shaped  bone, 
like  that  of  the  bird,  but  remaining  distinct.  The 
lower  end  of  the  fibula  is  much  more  slender, 
proportionally,  than  in  the  crocodile.  The  meta- 
tarsal bones  have  such  a  form  that  they  fit  together 
immovably,  though  they  do  not  enter  into  bony 
union ;  the  third  toe  is,  as  in  the  bird,  longest  and 
strongest.  In  fact,  the  ornithoscelidan  limb  is 
comparable  to  that  of  an  unhatched  chick. 

Taking  all  these  facts  together,  it  is  obvious 
that  the  view,  which  was  entertained  by  Mantell 
and  the  probability  of  which  was  demonstrated  by 


Ill 


LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION 


107 


your  own  distinguished  anatomist,  Leidy  while 
much  additional  evidence  in  the  same  direction 
has  been  furnished  by  Professor  Cope,  that  some 


108  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  m 

of  these  animals  may  have  walked  upon  their  hind 
legs,  as  birds  do,  acquires  great  weight.  In  fact, 
there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  one  of  the 
smaller  forms  of  the  Ornithoscelida,  Gompsogiiathus^ 
the  almost  entire  skeleton  of  which  has  been  dis- 
covered in  the  Solenhofen  slates,  was  a  bipedal 
animal.     The  parts  of  this  skeleton  are  somewhat 


Fig.  7. — Restoration"  of  CoiiPSOGNATHus  Longipes. 

twisted  out  of  their  natural  relations,  but  the 
accompanying  figure  gives  a  just  view  of  the 
general  form  of  Gompsognathus  and  of  the  propor- 
tions of  its  limbs ;  which,  in  some  respects,  are 
more  completely  bird-like  than  those  of  other 
Ornithoscelida, 


m  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  109 

We  have  had  to  stretch  the  definition  of  the 
class  of  birds  so  as  to  include  birds  with  teeth 
and  birds  with  paw-like  fore-limbs  and  long  tails. 
There  is  no  evidence  that  Comj)sognatli%is  possessed 
feathers  ;  but,  if  it  did,  it  would  be  hard  indeed  to 
say  whether  it  should  be  called  a  reptilian  bird  or 
an  avian  reptile. 

As  Com'psognat'hus  walked  upon  its  hind  legs,  it 
must  have  made  tracks  like  those  of  birds.  And 
as  the  structure  of  the  limbs  of  several  of  the 
gigantic  Ornithoscelida,  such  as  Iguandcn,  leads 
to  the  conclusion  that  they  also  may  have  con- 
stantly, or  occasionally,  assumed  the  same  attitude, 
a  peculiar  interest  attaches  to  the  fact  that,  in  the 
Wealden  strata  of  England,  there  are  to  be  found 
gigantic  footsteps,  arranged  in  order  like  those  of 
the  Brontozoum,  and  which  there  can  be  no  reason- 
able doubt  were  made  by  some  of  the  OrnitTiGscclida, 
the  remains  of  which  are  found  in  the  same 
rocks.  And,  knowing  that  reptiles  that  walked  upon 
their  hind  legs  and  shared  many  of  the  anatomi- 
cal characters  of  birds  did  once  exist,  it  becomes 
a  very  important  question  whether  the  tracks  in 
the  Trias  of  Massachusetts,  to  which  I  referred 
some  time  ago,  and  which  formerly  used  to  be 
unhesitatingly  ascribed  to  birds,  may  not  all  have 
been  made  by  Ornithoscelidan  reptiles ;  and 
whether,  if  we  could  obtain  the  skeletons  of  the 
animals  which  made  these  tracks,  we  should 
not  find   in  them    the  actual  steps   of  the   evo- 


110  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  III 

lutioDal  process  by  which  reptiles  gave  rise  to 
birds. 

The  evidential  value  of  the  facts  I  have  brought 
forward  in  this  Lecture  must  be  neither  over  nor 
under  estimated.  It  is  not  historical  proof  of  the 
occurrence  of  the  evolution  of  birds  from  reptiles, 
for  we  have  no  safe  ground  for  assuming  that  true 
birds  had  not  made  their  appearance  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  Mesozoic  epoch.  It  is,  in  fact, 
quite  possible  that  all  these  more  or  less  avi-form 
reptiles  of  the  Mesozoic  epoch  are  not  terms  in 
the  series  of  progression  from  birds  to  reptiles  at 
all,  but  simply  the  more  or  less  modified  de- 
scendants of  Palaeozoic  forms  through  which 
that  transition  was  actually  effected. 

We  are  not  in  a  position  to  say  that  the  known 
Ornithoscelida  are  intermediate  in  the  order  of  their 
appearance  on  the  earth  between  reptiles  and  birds. 
All  that  can  be  said  is  that,  if  independent  evidence 
of  the  actual  occurrence  of  evolution  is  producible, 
then  these  intercalary  forms  remove  every  difficulty 
in  the  way  of  understanding  what  the  actual 
steps  of  the  process,  in  the  case  of  birds,  may  have 
been. 

That  intercalary  forms  should  have  existed  in 
ancient  times  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  the 
truth  of  the  hypothesis  of  evolution ;  and,  hence, 
the  evidence  I  have  laid  before  you  in  proof  of 
the  existence  of  such  forms,  is,  so  far  as  it  goes, 
in  favour  of  that  hypothesis. 


m  LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION  111 

There  is  another  series  of  extinct  reptiles 
which  may  be  said  to  be  intercalary  between 
reptiles  and  birds,  in  so  far  as  they  combine  some 
of  the  characters  of  both  these  groups  ;  and  which, 
as  they  possessed  the  power  of  flight,  may  seem, 
at  first  sight,  to  be  nearer  representatives  of 
the  forms  by  which  the  transition  from  the 
reptile  to  the  bird  was  effected,  than  the 
Or7iithoscelida. 

These  are  the  Pterosatiria,  or  Pterodactyles,  the 
remains  of  which  are  met  with  throughout  the 
series  of  Mesozoic  rocks,  from  the  lias  to  the  chalk, 
and  some  of  which  attained  a  great  size,  their 
wings  having  a  span  of  eighteen  or  twenty  feet. 
These  animals,  in  the  form  and  proportions  of  the 
head  and  neck  relatively  to  the  body,  and  in  the  fact 
that  the  ends  of  the  jaws  were  often,  if  not  always, 
more  or  less  extensively  ensheathed  in  horny  beaks, 
remind  us  of  birds.  Moreover,  their  bones  con- 
tained air  cavities,  rendering  them  specifically 
lighter,  as  is  the  case  in  most  birds.  The  breast- 
bone was  large  and  keeled,  as  in  most  birds  and  in 
bats,  and  the  shoulder  girdle  is  strikingly  similar 
to  that  of  ordinary  birds.  But,  it  seems  to  me, 
that  the  special  resemblance  of  pterodactyles  to 
birds  ends  here,  unless  I  may  add  the  entire 
absence  of  teeth  which  characterises  the  great 
pterodactyles  (Fteranodon)  discovered  by  Professor 
Marsh.  All  other  known  pterodactyles  have  teeth 
lodged  in  sockets.     In  the  vertebral  column  and 


112 


LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION" 


in 


the  hind  lirabs  there  are  no  special  resemblances 
to  birds,  and  when  we  turn  to  the  wings  they  are 


Fig.  8. — Pterodacttlus  Spectabilis  (Yon  Meyer). 

found    to   be   constructed  on  a   totally  different 
principle  from  those  of  birds. 


Ill  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  113 

There  are  four  fingers.  These  four  fingers  are 
large,  and  three  of  them,  those  which  answer  to 
the  tliumb  and  two  following  lingers  in  my  hand 
—  are  terminated  by  claws,  while  the  fourth  is 
enormously  prolonged  and  converted  into  a  great 
jointed  style.  You  see  at  once,  from  what  I  have 
stated  about  a  bird's  wing,  that  there  could  be 
nothing  less  like  a  bird's  wing  than  this  is.  It 
was  concluded  by  general  reasoning  that  this  finger 
had  the  office  of  supporting  a  web  which  extended 
between  it  and  the  body.  An  existing  specimen 
proves  that  such  was  really  the  case,  and  that 
the  pterodactyles  were  devoid  of  feathers,  but 
that  the  fingers  supported  a  vast  web  like  that 
of  a  bat's  wing  ;  in  fact,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
this  ancient  reptile  flew  after  the  fashion  of  a  bat. 

Thus,  though  the  pterodactyle  is  a  reptile  which 
has  become  modified  in  such  a  manner  as  to  enable 
it  to  fly,  and  therefore,  as  might  be  expected,  pre- 
sents some  points  of  resemblance  to  other  animals 
which  fly  ;  it  has,  so  to  speak,  gone  off  the  line 
which  leads  directly  from  reptiles  to  birds,  and  has 
become  disqualified  for  the  changes  which  lead  to 
the  characteristic  organisation  of  the  latter  class. 
Therefore,  viewed  in  relation  to  the  classes  of 
reptiles  and  birds,  the  pterodactyles  appear  to  me 
to  be,  in  a  limited  sense,  intercalary  forms ;  but 
they  are  not  even  approximately  linear,  in  the 
sense  of  exemplifying  those  modifications  of 
structure  through  which  the  passage  from  the 
reptile  to  the  bird  took  place. 
91 


LECTimES  ON  ETOLUnON 

m 

THE    DEMOXSTRATIYE    EVIDE^'■CE     OF    ETOLUTION 

The  occurrence  of  historical  facts  is  said  to  be 
demonstrated,  when  the  e\4dence  that  they  hap- 
pened is  of  such  a  character  as  to  render  the  as- 
sumption that  they  did  not  happen  in  the  highest 
degree  improbable ;  and  the  question  I  now  have 
to  deal  with  is,  whether  evidence  in  favour  of  the 
evolution  of  animals  of  this  degree  of  coo^encv  is, 
or  is  not,  obtainable  from  the  record  of  the  suc- 
cession of  living  forms  which  is  presented  to  us 
by  fossil  remains. 

Those  who  have  attended  to  the  progress  of 
palaeontology  are  aware  that  evidence  of  the  char- 
acter which  I  have  defined  has  been  produced  in 
considerable  and  continually-increasing  quantity 
during  the  last  few  years.  Indeed,  the  amount 
and  the  satisfactory  nature  of  that  evidence  are 
somewhat  surprising,  when  we  consider  the  con- 
ditions under  which  alone  we  can  hope  to  ob- 
tain it. 


m  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  115 

It  is  obviously  useless  to  seek  for  such  evidence 
except  in  localities  in  which  the  physical  condi- 
tions have  been  such  as  to  permit  of  the  deposit 
of  an  unbroken,  or  but  rarely  interrupted,  series  of 
strata  through  a  long  period  of  time ;  in  which  the 
group  of  animals  to  be  investigated  has  existed  in 
such  abundance  as  to  furnish  the  requisite  supply 
of  remains ;  and  in  which,  finally,  the  materials 
composing  the  strata  are  such  as  to  ensure  the 
preservation  of  these  remains  in  a  tolerably  per- 
fect and  undisturbed  state. 

It  so  happens  that  the  case  which,  at  present, 
most  nearly  fulfils  all  these  conditions  is  that  of 
the  series  of  extinct  animals  which  culminates  in 
the  horses ;  by  which  term  I  mean  to  denote  not 
merely  the  domestic  animals  with  which  we  are  all 
so  well  acquainted,  but  their  allies,  the  ass,  zebra, 
quagga,  and  the  like.  In  short,  I  use  '"'  horses " 
as  the  equivalent  of  the  technical  name  Equidw, 
which  is  applied  to  the  whole  group  of  existing 
equiue  animals. 

The  horse  is  in  many  ways  a  remarkable 
animal ;  not  least  so  in  the  fact  that  it  presents 
us  with  an  example  of  one  of  the  most  perfect 
pieces  of  machinery  in  the  living  world.  In  truth, 
amono^  the  works  of  human  ingrenuitv  it  cannot  be 
said  that  there  is  any  locomotive  so  perfectly 
adapted  to  its  purposes,  doing  so  much  work  with 
so  small  a  quantity  of  fuel,  as  this  machine  of 
nature's  manufacture — the  horse.    And,  as  a  neces- 


IIG  LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION  ni 

sary  consaquence  of  any  sort  of  perfection,  of 
mechanical  j^erfection  as  of  others,  you  find  that 
the  horse  is  a  beautiful  creature,  one  of  the  most 
beautiful  of  all  land-animals.  Look  at  the  perfect 
balance  of  its  form,  and  the  rhythm  and  force  of 
its  action.  The  locomotive  machinery  is,  as  you 
are  aware,  resident  in  its  slender  fore  and  hind 
limbs ;  they  are  flexible  and  elastic  levers,  capable, 
of  being  moved  by  very  powerful  muscles  ;  and, 
in  order  to  supply  the  engines  which  work  these 
levers  with  the  force  which  they  expend,  the 
horse  is  provided  with  a  very  perfect  apparatus 
for  grinding  its  food  and  extracting  therefrom  the 
requisite  fuel. 

Without  attempting  to  take  you  very  far  into 
the  region  of  osteological  detail,  I  must  never- 
theless trouble  you  with  some  statements  respect- 
ing the  anatomical  structure  of  the  horse  ;  and, 
more  especially,  will  it  be  needful  to  obtain  a 
general  conception  of  the  structure  of  its  fore  and 
hind  limbs,  and  of  its  teeth.  But  I  shall  only 
touch  upon  those  points  which  are  absolutely 
essential  to  our  inquiry. 

Let  us  turn  in  the  first  place  to  the  fore-limb. 
In  most  quadrupeds,  as  in  ourselves,  the  fore-arm 
contains  distinct  bones  called  the  radius  and  the 
ulna.  The  corresponding  region  in  the  horse 
seems  at  first  to  possess  but  one  bone.  Careful 
observation,  however,  enables  us  to  distinguish  in 
this  bone  a  part  which  clearly  answers  to  the  upper 


ra  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  117 

end  of  the  ulna.  This  is  closely  united  with  the 
chief  mass  of  the  bone  which  represents  the  radius, 
and  runs  out  into  a  slender  shaft  which  may  be 
traced  for  some  distance  downwards  upon  the  back 
of  the  radius,  and  then  inmost  cases  thins  out  and 
vanishes.  It  takes  still  more  trouble  to  make  sure 
of  what  is  nevertheless  the  fact,  that  a  small  part 
of  the  lower  end  of  the  bone  of  the  horse's  fore- 
arm, which  is  only  distinct  in  a  very  young  foal, 
is  really  the  lower  extremity  of  the  ulna. 

What  is  commonly  called  the  knee  of  a  horse 
is  its  wrist.  The  "  cannon  bone  "  answers  to  the 
middle  bone  of  the  five  metacarpal  bones,  which 
support  the  palm  of  the  hand  in  ourselves.  The 
"  pastern,"  "  coronary,"  and  ''  coffin  "  bones  of  vet- 
erinarians answer  to  the  joints  of  our  middle 
fingers,  while  the  hoof  is  simply  a  greatly  enlarged 
and  thickened  nail.  But  if  what  lies  below  the 
horse's  "  knee "  thus  corresponds  to  the  middle 
finger  in  ourselves,  what  has  become  of  the  four 
other  fingers  or  digits  ?  We  find  in  the  places  of 
the  second  and  fourth  digits  only  two  slender 
splint-like  bones,  about  two-thirds  as  long  as  the 
cannon  bone,  which  gradually  taper  to  their  lower 
ends  and  bear  no  finger  joints,  or,  as  they  are 
termed,  phalanges.  Sometimes,  small  bony  or 
gristly  nodules  are  to  be  found  at  the  bases  of 
these  two  metacar,pal  splints,  and  it  is  probable 
that  these  represent  rudiments  of  the  first  and  fifth 
toes.    Thus,  the  part  of  the  horse's  skeleton,  which 


118  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  in 

corresponds  with  that  of  the  human  hand,  con- 
tains one  overgrown  middle  digit,  and  at  least 
two  imperfect  lateral  digits  ;  and  these  answer,  re- 
spectively, to  the  third,  the  second,  and  the  fourth 
fingers  in  man. 

Corresponding  modifications  are  found  in  the 
hind  limb.  In  ourselves,  and  in  most  quadrupeds, 
the  leg  contains  two  distinct  bones,  a  large  bone, 
the  tibia,  and  a  smaller  and  more  slender  bone, 
the  fibula.  But,  in  the  horse,  the  fibula  seems, 
at  first,  to  be  reduced  to  its  upper  end  ;  a  short 
slender  bone  united  with  the  tibia,  and  ending  in 
a  point  below,  occupying  its  place.  Examination 
of  the  lower  end  of  a  young  foal's  shin-bone,  how- 
ever, shows  a  distinct  portion  of  osseous  matter, 
which  is  the  lower  end  of  the  fibula ;  so  that  the, 
apparently  single,  lower  end  of  the  shin-bone  is 
really  made  up  of  the  coalesced  ends  of  the  tibia 
and  fibula,  just  as  the,  apparently  single,  lower 
end  of  the  fore-arm  bone  is  composed  of  the  coal- 
esced radius  and  ulna. 

The  heel  of  the  horse  is  the  part  commonly 
known  as  the  hock.  The  hinder  cannon  bone 
answers  to  the  middle  metatarsal  bone  of  the 
human  foot,  the  pastern,  coronary,  and  coffin 
bones,  to  the  middle  toe  bones  ;  the  hind  hoof  to 
the  nail ;  as  in  the  fore-foot.  And,  as  in  the  fore- 
foot, there  are  merely  two  splints  to  represent  the 
second  and  the  fourth  toes.  Sometimes  a  rudi- 
ment of  a  fifth  toe  appears  to  be  traceable. 


m  LECTURES  ON   EVOLUTION  IID 

The  teeth  of  a  horse  are  not  less  peculiar  than 
its  limbs.  The  living  engine,  like  all  others,  must 
be  well  stoked  if  it  is  to  do  its  work  ;  and  the 
horse,  if  it  is  to  make  good  its  wear  and  tear,  and 
to  exert  the  enormous  amount  of  force  required 
for  its  propulsion,  must  be  well  and  rapidly  fed. 
To  this  end,  good  cutting  instruments  and  power- 
ful and  lasting  crushers  are  needful.  Accordingly, 
the  twelve  cutting  teeth  of  a  horse  are  close  set 
and  concentrated  in  the  fore-part  of  its  mouth, 
like  so  many  adzes  or  chisels.  The  grinders  or 
molars  are  large,  and  have  an  extremely  compli- 
cated structure,  being  composed  of  a  number  of 
different  substances  of  unequal  hardness.  The 
consequence  of  this  is  that  they  wear  away  at 
different  rates  ;  and,  hence,  the  surface  of  each 
grinder  is  always  as  uneven  as  that  of  a  good 
millstone. 

I  have  said  that  the  structure  of  the  grinding 
teeth  is  very  complicated,  the  harder  and  the 
softer  parts  being,  as  it  were,  interlaced  with  one 
another.  The  result  of  this  is  that,  as  the  tooth 
w^ears,  the  crown  presents  a  peculiar  pattern,  the 
nature  of  which  is  not  very  easily  deciphered  at 
first ;  but  which  it  is  important  Ave  should  under- 
stand clearly.  Each  grinding  tooth  of  the  upper 
jaw  has  an  oitter  ivall  so  shaped  that,  on  the  worn 
crown,  it  exhibits  the  form  of  two  crescents,  one 
in  front  and  one  behind,  with  their  concave  sides 
turned   outwards.      From  the  inner  side  of  the 


120  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION"  m 

front  crescent,  a  crescentic  front  ridge  passes 
inwards  and  backwards,  and  its  inner  face  enlarges 
into  a  strong  longitudinal  fold  or  'pillar.  From 
the  front  part  of 'the  hinder  crescent,  a  laclz  ridge 
takes  a  like  direction,  and  also  has  its  pillar. 

The  deep  interspaces  or  xalleys  between  these 
ridges  and  the  outer  wall  are  filled  by  bony 
substance,  which  is  called  cement,  and  coats  the 
whole  tooth. 

The  pattern  of  the  worn  face  of  each  grinding 
tooth  of  the  lower  jaw  is  quite  different.  It 
appears  to  be  formed  of  two  crescent- shaped 
ridges,  the  convexities  of  which  are  turned  out- 
wards. The  free  extremity  of  each  crescent  has  a 
pillar,  and  there  is  a  large  double  pillar  where 
the  two  crescents  meet.  The  whole  structure  is, 
as  it  were,  imbedded  in  cement,  which  fills  up  the 
valleys,  as  in  the  upper  grinders. 

If  the  grinding  faces  of  an  upper  and  of  a  lower 
molar  of  the  same  side  are  applied  together,  it 
will  be  seen  that  the  apposed  ridges  are  nowhere 
parallel,  but  that  they  frequently  cross  ;  and  that 
thus,  in  the  act  of  mastication,  a  hard  surface  in 
the  one  is  constantly  applied  to  a  soft  surface  in 
the  other,  and  vice  versa.  They  thus  constitute  a 
grinding  apparatus  of  great  efiiciency,  and  one 
which  is  repaired  as  fast  as  it  wears,  owing  to  the 
long-continued  growth  of  the  teeth. 

Some  other  peculiarities  of  the  dentition  of  the 
horse  must  be  noticed,  as  they  bear  upon  what  I 


in  LECTURES   ON    EVOLUTION  121 

shall  have  to  say  by  and  by.  Thus  the  crowns  of 
the  cutting  teeth  have  a  peculiar  deep  pit,  which 
gives  rise  to  the  well-known  "  mark  "  of  the  horse. 
There  is  a  large  space  between  the  outer  incisors 
and  the  front  grinder.  In  this  space  the  adult 
male  horse  presents,  near  the  incisors  on  each 
side,  above  and  below,  a  canine  or  "  tush,"  which 
is  commonly  absent  in  mares.  In  a  young  horse, 
moreover,  there  is  not  unfrequently  to  be  seen  in 
front  of  the  first  grinder,  a  very  small  tooth, 
which  soon  falls  out.  If  this  small  tooth  be 
counted  as  one,  it  will  be  found  that  there  are 
seven  teeth  behind  the  canine  on  each  side ; 
namely,  the  small  tooth  in  question,  and  the  six 
great  grinders,  among  which,  by  an  unusual 
peculiarity,  the  foremost  tooth  is  rather  larger 
than  those  which  follow  it. 

I  have  now  enumerated  those  characteristic 
structures  of  the  horse  which  are  of  most  import- 
ance for  the  purpose  we  have  in  view. 

To  any  one  who  is  acquainted  with  the  mor- 
phology of  vertebrated  animals,  they  show  that 
the  horse  deviates  widely  from  the  general 
structure  of  mammals;  and  that  the  horse  type 
is,  in  many  respects,  an  extreme  modification  of 
the  general  mammalian  plan.  The  least  modified 
mammals,  in  fact,  have  the  radius  and  ulna,  the 
tibia  and  fibula,  distinct  and  separate.  They 
have  five  distinct  and  complete  digits  on  each 
foot,  and  no  one  of  these  digits  is  very  much 


122  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  m 

larger  than  tlie  rest.  Moreover,  in  the  least 
modified  mammals,  the  total  number  of  the  teeth 
is  very  generally  forty- four,  while  in  horses,  the 
usual  number  is  forty,  and  in  the  absence  of  the 
canines,  it  may  be  reduced  to  thirty-six ;  the 
incisor  teeth  are  devoid  of  the  fold  seen  in  those 
of  the  horse  :  the  grinders  regularly  diminish  in 
size  from  the  middle  of  the  series  to  its  front 
end ;  while  their  crowns  are  short,  early  attain 
their  full  length,  and  exhibit  simple  ridges  or 
tubercles,  in  place  of  the  complex  foldings  of  the 
horse's  grinders. 

Hence  the  general  principles  of  the  hypothesis 
of  evolution  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  the  horse 
must  have  been  derived  from  some  quadruped 
which  possessed  five  complete  digits  on  each  foot ; 
which  had  the  bones  of  the  fore-arm  and  of  the 
leg  complete  and  separate ;  and  which  possessed 
forty-four  teeth,  among  which  the  crowns  of  the 
incisors  and  grinders  had  a  simple  structure  ; 
while  the  latter  gradually  increased  in  size  from 
before  backwards,  at  any  rate  in  the  anterior  part 
of  the  series,  and  had  short  crowns. 

And  if  the  horse  has  been  thus  evolved,  and 
the  remains  of  the  different  stages  of  its  evolution 
have  been  preserved,  they  ought  to  present  us 
with  a  series  of  forms  in  which  the  number  of  the 
diofits  becomes  reduced  ;  the  bones  of  the  fore-arm 
and  leg  gradually  take  on  the  equine  condition; 
and   the    form    and    arrangement    of   the   teeth 


ni  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  123 

successively  approximate  to  those  which  obtain 
in  existing  horses. 

Let  us  turn  to  the  facts,  and  see  how  far  they 
fulfil  these  requirements  of  the  doctrine  of  evolu- 
tion. 

In  Europe  abundant  remains  of  horses  are 
found  in  the  Quaternary  and  later  Tertiary  strata 
as  far  as  the  Pliocene  formation.  But  these 
horses,  which  are  so  common  in  the  cave-deposits 
and  in  the  gravels  of  Europe,  are  in  all  essential 
respects  like  existing  horses.  And  that  is  true  of 
all  the  horses  of  the  latter  part  of  the  Pliocene 
epoch.  But,  in  deposits  which  belong  to  the 
earlier  Pliocene  and  later  Miocene  epochs,  and 
which  occur  in  Britain,  in  France,  in  Germany,  in 
Greece,  in  India,  we  find  animals  which  are 
extremely  like  horses — which,  in  fact,  are  so 
similar  to  horses,  that  you  may  follow  descriptions 
given  in  works  upon  the  anatomy  of  the  horse 
upon  the  skeletons  of  these  animals — but  which 
differ  in  some  important  particulars.  For  example, 
the  structure  of  their  fore  and  hmd  limbs  is 
somewhat  different.  The  bones  which,  in  the 
horse,  are  represented  by  two  splints,  imperfect 
below,  are  as  long  as  the  middle  metacarpal  and 
metatarsal  bones  ;  and,  attached  to  the  extremity 
of  each,  is  a  digit  with  three  joints  of  the  same 
general  character  as  those  of  the  middle  digit, 
only  very  much  smaller.  These  small  digits  are 
so  disposed  that  they  could  have  had  but  very 


124  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  m 

little  functional  importance,  and  they  must  have 
been  rather  of  the  nature  of  the  dew-claws,  such 
as  are  to  be  found  in  many  ruminant  animals. 
The  Hipparion,  as  the  extinct  European  three- 
toed  horse  is  called,  in  fact,  presents  a  foot  similar 
to  that  of  the  American  Frotohipjms  (Fig.  9), 
except  that,  in  the  Hipparion,  the  smaller  digits 
are  situated  farther  back,  and  are  of  smaller  pro- 
portional size,  than  in  the  Frotohippus. 

The  ulna  is  slightly  more  distinct  than  in  the 
horse ;  and  the  whole  length  of  it,  as  a  very 
slender  shaft,  intimately  united  with  the  radius, 
is  completely  traceable.  The  fibula  appears  to 
be  in  the  same  condition  as  in  the  horse.  The 
teeth  of  the  Hippario'rt  are  essentially  similar 
to  those  of  the  horse,  but  the  pattern  of  the 
grinders  is  in  some  respects  a  little  more  com- 
plex, and  there  is  a  depression  on  the  face  of 
the  skull  in  front  of  the  orbit,  which  is  not  seen 
in  existing  horses. 

In  the  earlier  Miocene,  and  perhaps  the  later 
Eocene  deposits  of  some  parts  of  Europe,  another 
extinct  animal  has  been  discovered,  which  Cuvier, 
who  first  described  some  fragments  of  it,  con- 
sidered to  be  a  Paloiotherium.  But  as  further 
discoveries  threw  new  light  upon  its  structure, 
it  was  recognised  as  a  distinct  genus,  under  the 
name  of  Anchitherium. 

In  its  general  characters,  the  skeleton  oiAnchi- 
therium  is  very  similar  to  that  of  the  horse.     In 


m  LECTURES  ON    EVOLUTION  125 

fact,  Lartet  and  De  Blainville  called  it  Palwothcrimn 
equinum  or  hippoides ;  and  De  Cliristol,  in  184^7, 
said  that  it  differed  from  Ilipparion  in  little  more 
than  the  characters  of  its  teeth,  and  gave  it  the 
name  of  Hipparitherium.  Each  foot  possesses 
three  complete  toes ;  while  the  lateral  toes  are 
much  larger  in  proportion  to  the  middle  toe 
than  in  Hipparion,  and  doubtless  rested  on  the 
ground  in  ordinary  locomotion. 

The  ulna  is  complete  and  quite  distinct  from 
the  radius,  though  firmly  united  with  the  latter. 
The  fibula  seems  also  to  have  been  complete. 
Its  lower  end,  though  intimately  united  with  that 
of  the  tibia,  is  clearly  marked  off  from  the  latter 
bone. 

There  are  forty-four  teeth.  The  incisors  have 
no  strong  pit.  The  canines  seem  to  have  been 
well  developed  in  both  sexes.  The  first  of  the 
seven  grinders,  which,  as  I  have  said,  is  frequently 
absent,  and,  when  it  does  exist,  is  small  in  the 
horse,  is  a  good-sized  and  permanent  tooth,  while 
the  grinder  which  follows  it  is  but  little  larger 
than  the  hinder  ones.  The  crowns  of  the  grinders 
are  short,  and  though  the  fundamental  pattern 
of  the  horse -tooth  is  discernible,  the  front  and 
back  ridges  are  less  curved,  the  accessory  pillars 
are  wanting,  and  the  valleys,  much  shallower,  are 
not  filled  up  with  cement. 

Seven  years  ago,  when  I  happened  to  be  looking 
critically  into  the  bearing  of  palseoutological  facts 


126  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  in 

upon  the  doctrine  of  evolution,  it  appeared  to  me 
that  the  Anchitherium,  the  Hipioarion,  and  the 
modern  horses,  constitute  a  series  in  which  the 
modifications  of  structure  coincide  with  the  order 
of  chronological  occurrence,  in  the  manner  in 
which  they  must  coincide,  if  the  modern  horses 
really  are  the  result  of  the  gradual  metamor- 
phosis, in  the  course  of  the  Tertiary  epoch,  of 
a  less  specialised  ancestral  form.  And  I  found 
by  correspondence  with  the  late  eminent  French 
anatomist  and  palaeontologist,  M.  Lartet,  that  he 
had  arrived  at  the  same  conclusion  from  the 
same  data. 

That  the  Anchitherium  type  had  become  meta- 
morphosed into  the  Hipparion  type,  and  the 
latter  into  the  Equine  type,  in  the  course  of 
that  period  of  time  which  is  represented  by  the 
latter  half  of  the  Tertiary  deposits,  seemed  to 
me  to  be  the  only  explanation  of  the  facts  for 
which  there  was  even  a  shadow  of  probability.^ 

And,  hence,  I  have  ever  since  held  that  these 
facts  afford  evidence  of  the  occurrence  of  evo- 
lution, which,  in  the  sense  already  defined,  may 
be  termed  demonstrative. 

^  I  nse  the  word  "type  "  because  it  is  highly  probable  that 
many  forms  of  Jnchithcrmm-like  and  Jlipparion-like  animals 
existed  in  the  Miocene  and  Pliocene  epochs,  just  as  many  species 
of  the  horse  tribe  exist  now  ;  and  it  is  highly  improbalDle  that 
the  particular  species  of  Anchitherium  or  Hipparion,  which 
happen  to  have  been  discovered,  should  be  precisely  those 
which  have  formed  part  of  the  direct  line  of  the  horse's 
pedigree. 


Ill  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  127 

All  who  have  occupied  themselves  with  the 
structure  oi  Ancliithcrium,  from  Cuvier  onwards, 
have  acknowledged  its  many  points  of  likeness  to 
a  well-known  genus  of  extinct  Eocene  mammals, 
Falceotherium.  Indeed,  as  we  have  seen,  Cuvier 
regarded  his  remains  of  AncMthcrium  as  those 
of  a  species  of  Falceothermm.  Hence,  in  attempt- 
ing to  trace  the  pedigree  of  the  horse  beyond 
the  Miocene  epoch  and  the  Anchitheroid  form, 
I  naturally  souglit  among  the  various  species  of 
Palaeotheroid  animals  for  its  nearest  ally,  and  I 
was  led  to  conclude  that  the  Falceotherium.  minus 
(Flagiolophus)  represented  the  next  step  more 
nearly  than  any  form  then  known. 

I  think  that  this  opinion  was  fully  justifiable ; 
but  the  progress  of  investigation  has  thrown  an 
unexpected  light  on  the  question,  and  has  brought 
us  much  nearer  than  could  have  been  anticipated 
to  a  knowledge  of  the  true  series  of  the  progeni- 
tors of  the  horse. 

You  are  all  aware  that,  when  your  country 
was  first  discovered  by  Europeans,  there  were  no 
traces  of  the  existence  of  the  horse  in  any  part 
of  the  American  Continent.  The  accounts  of  the 
conquest  of  Mexico  dwell  upon  the  astonishment 
of  the  natives  of  that  country  when  they  first 
became  acquainted  with  that  astounding  pheno- 
menon— a  man  seated  upon  a  horse.  Neverthe- 
less, the  investigations  of  American  geologists 
have  proved  that  the  remains  of  horses  occur  in 


128  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  ir 

the  most  superficial  deposits  of  both  North  and 
South  America,  just  as  they  do  in  Europe. 
Therefore,  for  some  reason  or  other — no  feasible 
suggestion  on  that  subject,  so  far  as  I  know,  has 
been  made — the  horse  must  have  died  out  on 
this  continent  at  some  period  preceding  the  dis- 
covery of  America.  Of  late  years  there  has  been 
discovered  in  your  Western  Territories  that 
marvellous  accumulation  of  deposits,  admirably 
adapted  for  the  preservation  of  organic  remains, 
to  which  I  referred  the  other  evening,  and  which 
furnishes  us  with  a  consecutive  series  of  records 
of  the  fauna  of  the  older  half  of  the  Tertiary 
epoch,  for  which  we  have  no  parallel  in  Europe. 
They  have  yielded  fossils  in  an  excellent  state 
of  conservation  and  in  unexampled  number  and 
variety.  The  researches  of  Leidy  and  others 
have  shown  that  forms  allied  to  the  Hvpjyarion 
and  the  Anchitherium  are  to  be  found  among 
these  remains.  But  it  is  only  recently  that  the 
admirably  conceived  and  most  thoroughly  and 
patiently  worked-out  investigations  of  Professor 
Marsh  have  given  us  a  just  idea  of  the  vast  fossil 
wealth,  and  of  the  scientific  importance,  of  these 
deposits.  I  have  had  the  advantage  of  glancing 
over  the  collections  in  Yale  Museum ;  and  I  can 
truly  say  that,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  extend s^ 
there  is  no  collection  from  any  one  region  and 
series  of  strata  comparable,  for  extent,  or  for  the 
care  with  which  the  remains  have  been  got  to- 


Ill  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  129 

getlier,  or  for  tlieir  scientific  importance,  to  the 
series  of  fossils  which  he  has  deposited  there. 
This  vast  collection  has  yielded  evidence  bearing 
upon  the  question  of  the  pedigree  of  the  horse 
of  the  most  striking  character.  It  tends  to  show 
that  we  must  look  to  America,  rather  than  to 
Europe,  for  the  original  seat  of  the  equine  series ; 
and  that  the  archaic  forms  and.  successive  modifi- 
cations of  the  horse's  ancestry  are  far  better 
preserved  here  than  in  Europe. 

Professor  Marsh's  kindness  has  enabled  me  to 
put  before  you  a  diagram,  every  figure  in  which  is 
an  actual  representation  of  some  specimen  which 
is  to  be  seen  at  Yale  at  this  present  time 
(Fig.  9). 

The  succession  of  forms  which  he  has  brought 
together  carries  us  from  the  top  to  the  bottom 
of  the  Tertiaries.  Firstly,  there  is  the  true  horse. 
Next  we  have  the  American  Pliocene  form  of  the 
horse  (Pliohippits) ;  in  the  conformation  of  its  limbs 
it  presents  some  very  slight  deviations  from  the 
ordinary  horse,  and  the  crowns  of  the  grinding 
teeth  are  shorter.  Then  comes  the  Frotohi2J2^us, 
which  represents  the  European  Hip;parion,  having 
one  large  digit  and  two  small  ones  on  each  foot, 
and  the  general  characters  of  the  fore-arm  and  leg 
to  which  I  have  referred.  But  it  is  more  valuable 
than  the  European  Hipparion  for  the  reason  that 
it  is  devoid  of  some  of  the  peculiarities  of  that 
form — peculiarities  which  tend  to  show  that  the 


Fore  Fuot       Hiiiil  Foot.      Fore-arm.    Leg.  Upper  Molar.  Lower  Molar. 


RECENT. 


EQTJUS. 


PLIOCENE. 


PLIOHIPPUS. 


PROTOHIPPUS 
(Hipparion). 


MIOCENE. 


MIOHIPPUS 

{Anehitherium). 


HESOHIPPtJS. 


EOCENE. 


FlQ.  9. 


in  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTIOIT  181 

European  Hipparion  is  rather  a  member  of  a 
collateral  branch,  than  a  form  in  the  direct  line  of 
succession.  Next,  in  the  backward  order  in  time, 
is  the  Mioliiiopus,  which  corresponds  pretty  nearly 
with  the  Anchitherium  of  Europe.  It  presents 
three  complete  toes — one  large  median  and  two 
smaller  lateral  ones ;  and  there  is  a  rudiment  of 
that  digit,  which  answers  to  the  little  finger  of  the 
human  hand. 

The  European  record  of  the  pedigree  of  the  horse 
stops  here ;  in  the  American  Tertiaries,  on  the 
contrary,  the  series  of  ancestral  equine  forms  is 
continued  into  the  Eocene  formations.  An  older 
Miocene  form,  termed  3Iesohippus,  has  three  toes 
in  front,  with  a  large  splint-like  rudiment  repre- 
senting the  little  finger ;  and  three  toes  behind. 
The  radius  and  ulna,  the  tibia  and  the  fibula,  are 
distinct,  and  the  short  crowned  molar  teeth  are 
anchitherioid  in  pattern. 

But  the  most  important  discovery  of  all  is  the 
Orohippus,  which  comes  from  the  Eocene  formation, 
and  is  the  oldest  member  of  the  equine  series,  as 
yet  known.  Here  we  find  four  complete  toes  on 
the  front  limb,  three  toes  on  the  hind-limb,  a  well- 
developed  ulna,  a  well-developed  fibula,  and  short- 
crowned  grinders  of  simple  pattern. 

Thus,  thanks  to  these  important  researches,  it 
has  become  evident  that,  so  far  as  our  present 
knowledge  extends,  the  history  of  the  horse-type 
is  exactly  and  precisely  that  which  could  have  beea 


132  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  m 

predicted  from  a  knowledge  of  the  principles  of 
evolution.  And  the  knowledge  we  now  possess 
justifies  us  completely  in  the  anticipation,  that 
when  the  still  lower  Eocene  deposits,  and  those 
which  belong  to  the  Cretaceous  epoch,  have  yielded 
up  their  remains  of  ancestral  equine  animals,  we 
shall  find,  first,  a  form  with  four  complete  toes  and 
a  rudiment  of  the  innermost  or  first  digit  in  front, 
with,  probably,  a  rudiment  of  the  fifth  digit  in  the 
hind  foot;^  wliile,  in  still  older  forms,  the  series  of 
the  digits  will  be  more  and  more  complete,  until 
we  come  to  the  five-toed  animals,  in  which,  if  the 
doctrine  of  evolution  is  well  founded,  the  whole 
series  must  have  taken  its  origin. 

That  is  what  I  mean  by  demonstrative  evi- 
dence of  evolution.  An  inductive  hypothesis  is 
said  to  be  demonstrated  when  the  facts  are 
shown  to  be  in  entire  accordance  with  it.  If 
that  is  not  scientific  proof,  there  are  no  merely 
inductive  conclusions  which  can  be  said  to  be 
proved.  And  the  doctrine  of  evolution,  at  the 
present  time,  rests  upon  exactly  as  secure  a  foun- 
dation as  the  Copernican  theory  of  the  motions 
of  the  heavenly  bodies  did  at  the  time  of  its  pro- 
mulgation.     Its  logical  basis  is  precisely  of  the 

*  Since  this  lecture  was  delivered,  Professor  Marsh  has 
discovered  a  new  genus  of  equine  mammals  (Eohijjp^cs)  from  the 
lowest  Eocene  deposits  of  the  West,  which  corresponds  very 
nearly  to  this  description. — American  Journal  qf  Science, 
November,  1876. 


Ill  LECTURES   ON    EVOLUTION  133 

same  character — the  coincidence  of  the  observed 
facts  with  theoretical  requirements. 

The  only  way  of  escape,  if  it  be  a  way  of  escape, 
from  the  conclusions  which  I  have  just  indicated, 
is  the  supposition  that  all  these  different  equine 
forms  have  been  created  separately  at  separate 
epochs  of  time  ;  and,  I  repeat,  that  of  such  an 
hypothesis  as  this  there  neither  is,  nor  can  be,  any 
scientific  evidence;  and,  assuredly,  so  far  as  I 
know,  there  is  none  which  is  supported,  or  pretends 
to  be  supported,  by  evidence  or  authority  of  any 
other  kind.  I  can  but  think  that  the  time  will  come 
when  such  suggestions  as  these,  such  obvious 
attempts  to  escape  the  force  of  demonstration,  will 
be  put  upon  the  same  footing  as  the  supposition 
made  by  some  writers,  who  are  I  believe  not 
completely  extinct  at  present,  that  fossils  are  mere 
simulacra,  are  no  indications  of  the  former  exist- 
ence of  the  animals  to  which  they  seem  to  belong ; 
but  that  they  are  either  sports  of  Nature,  or  special 
creations,  intended — as  I  heard  suggested  the 
other  day — to  test  our  faith. 

In  fact,  the  whole  evidence  is  in  favour  of  evo- 
lution, and  there  is  none  against  it.  And  I  say 
this,  although  perfectly  well  aware  of  the  seeming 
difficulties  which  have  been  built  up  upon  what 
appears  to  the  uninformed  to  be  a  solid  foun- 
dation. I  meet  constantly  with  the  argument 
that  the  doctrine  of  evolution  cannot  be  we]] 
founded,  because  it  requires  the  lapse  of  a  very 


184  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  m 

vast  period  of  time;  while  the  duration  of  life 
upon  the  earth  thus  implied  is  inconsistent  with 
the  conclusions  arrived  at  by  the  astronomer  and 
the  physicist.  I  may  venture  to  say  that  I  am 
familiar  with  those  conclusions,  inasmuch  as  some 
years  ago,  when  President  of  the  Geological 
Society  of  London,  I  took  the  liberty  of  criti- 
cising them,  and  of  showing  in  what  respects, 
as  it  appeared  to  me,  they  lacked  complete  and 
thorough  demonstration.  But,  putting  that  point 
aside,  suppose  that,  as  the  astronomers,  or  some 
of  them,  and  some  physical  philosophers,  tell  us, 
it  is  impossible  that  life  could  have  endured  upon 
the  earth  for  as  long  a  period  as  is  required  by 
the  doctrine  of  evolution — supposing  that  to  be 
proved — I  desire  to  be  informed,  what  is  the 
foundation  for  the  statement  that  evolution  does 
require  so  great  a  time  ?  The  biologist  knows 
nothings  whatever  of  the  amount  of  time  which 
may  be  required  for  the  process  of  evolution.  It 
is  a  matter  of  fact  that  the  equine  forms  which 
I  have  described  to  you  occur,  in  the  order  stated, 
in  the  Tertiary  formations.  But  I  have  not  the 
slightest  means  of  guessing  whether  it  took  a 
million  of  years,  or  ten  millions,  or  a  hundred 
millions,  or  a  thousand  millions  of  years,  to  give 
rise  to  that  series  of  changes.  A  biologist  has 
no  means  of  arriving  at  any  conclusion  as  to  the 
amount  of  time  which  may  be  needed  for  a 
certain  quantity   of  organic   change      He   takes 


m  LECTURES   ON   EVOLUTION  135 

Ms  time  from  the  geologist.  The  geologist,  con- 
sidering  the  rate  at  which  deposits  are  formed 
and  the  rate  at  which  denudation  goes  on  upon 
the  surface  of  the  earth,  arrives  at  more  or  less 
justifiable  conclusions  as  to  the  time  which  is 
required  for  the  deposit  of  a  certain  thickness 
of  rocks;  and  if  he  tells  me  that  the  Tertiary- 
formations  required  500,000,000  years  for  their 
deposit,  I  suppose  he  has  good  ground  for  what 
he  says,  and  I  take  that  as  a  measure  of  the 
duration  of  the  evolution  of  the  horse  from  the 
Oroliippus  up  to  its  present  condition.  And,  if 
he  is  right,  undoubtedly  evolution  is  a  very  slow 
process,  and  requires  a  great  deal  of  time.  But 
suppose,  now,  that  an  astronomer  or  a  physicist — 
for  instance,  my  friend  Sir  William  Thomson — 
tells  me  that  my  geological  authority  is  quite 
wrong ;  and  that  he  has  weighty  evidence  to 
show  that  life  could  not  possibly  have  existed 
upon  the  surface  of  the  earth  500,000,000  years 
ago,  because  the  earth  would  have  then  been 
too  hot  to  allow  of  life,  my  reply  is :  *'  That  is 
not  my  affair;  settle  that  with  the  geologist, 
and  when  you  have  come  to  an  agreement  among 
yourselves  I  wiU  adopt  your  conclusion."  We 
take  our  time  from  the  geologists  and  physicists ; 
and  it  is  monstrous  that,  having  taken  our  time 
from  the  physical  philosopher's  clock,  the  phy- 
sical philosopher  should  turn  round  upon  us,  and 
say    we   are    too    fast   or  too    slow.     What   we 


136  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  m 

desire  to  know  is,  is  it  a  fact  that  evolution 
took  place  ?  As  to  the  amount  of  time  which 
evolution  may  have  occupied,  we  are  in  the 
hands  of  the  physicist  and  the  astronomer,  whose 
business  it  is  to  deal  with  those  questions. 

I  have  now,  ladies  and  gentlemen,  arrived  at 
the  conclusion  of  the  task  which  I  set  before 
myself  when  I  undertook  to  deliver  these  lectures. 
My  purpose  has  been,  not  to  enable  those  among 
you  who  have  paid  no  attention  to  these  subjects 
before,  to  leave  this  room  in  a  condition  to  decide 
upon  the  validity  or  the  invalidity  of  the  hypo- 
thesis of  evolution;  but  I  have  desired  to  put 
before  you  the  principles  upon  which  all  hypo- 
theses respecting  the  history  of  Nature  must  be 
judged;  and  furthermore,  to  make  apparent  the 
nature  of  the  evidence  and  the  amount  of  cogency 
which  is  to  be  expected  and  may  be  obtained 
from  it.  To  this  end,  I  have  not  hesitated  to 
regard  you  as  genuine  students  and  persons  de- 
sirous of  knowing  the  truth.  I  have  not  shrunk 
from  taking  you  through  long  discussions,  that 
I  fear  may  have  sometimes  tried  your  patience; 
and  I  have  inflicted  upon  you  details  which 
were  indispensable,  but  which  may  well  have 
been  wearisome.  But  I  shall  rejoice — I  shall 
consider  that  I  have  done  you  the  greatest  ser- 
vice which  it  was  in  my  power  to  do — if  I  have 
thus  convinced  you  that  the  great  question  which 


m  LECTURES   ON  EVOLUTION  187 

we  have  been  discussing  is  not  one  to  be  dealt 
with  by  rhetorical  flourishes,  or  by  loose  and 
superficial  talk ;  but  that  it  requires  the  keen 
attention  of  the  trained  intellect  and  the  patience 
of  the  accurate  observer. 

When  I  commenced  this  series  of  lectures,  I 
did  not  think  it  necessary  to  preface  them  with 
a  prologue,  such  as  might  be  expected  from  a 
stranger  and  a  foreigner;  for  during  my  brief 
stay  in  your  country,  I  have  found  it  very  hard 
to  believe  that  a  stranger  could  be  possessed  of 
so  many  friends,  and  almost  harder  that  a 
foreigner  could  express  himself  in  your  language 
in  such  a  way  as  to  be,  to  all  appearance,  so 
readily  intelligible.  So  far  as  I  can  judge,  that 
most  intelligent,  and  perhaps,  I  may  add,  most 
singularly  active  and  enterprising  body,  your 
press  reporters,  do  not  seem  to  have  been  de- 
terred by  my  accent  from  giving  the  fullest 
account  of  everything  that  I  happen  to  have 
said. 

But  the  vessel  in  which  I  take  my  departure 
to-morrow  morning  is  even  now  ready  to  slip 
her  moorings ;  I  awake  from  my  delusion  that 
I  am  other  than  a  strano^er  and  a  foreigner.  I 
am  ready  to  go  back  to  my  place  and  country ; 
but,  before  doing  so,  let  me,  by  way  of  epilogue, 
tender  to  you  my  most  hearty  thanks  for  the 
kind  and  cordial  reception  which  you  have  ac- 
corded to  me;  and  let  me  thank  you  still  more 


138  LECTURES  ON  EVOLUTION  iii 

for  that  which  is  the  greatest  compliment  which 
can  be  afforded  to  any  person  in  my  position — 
the  continuous  and  undisturbed  attention  which 
you  have  bestowed  upon  the  long  argument 
which  I  have  had  the  honour  to  lay  before  you. 


IV 

THE   INTERPRETERS   OF  GENESIS  AND 
THE  INTERPRETERS  OF  NATURE 

[1885] 

Our  fabulist  warns  "  those  who  in  quarrels  inter- 
pose "  of  the  fate  which  is  probably  in  store  for 
them ;  and,  in  venturing  to  place  myself  between 
so  powerful  a  controversialist  as  Mr.  Gladstone 
and  the  eminent  divine  whom  he  assaults  with 
such  vigour  in  the  last  number  of  this  Review/  I 
am  fully  aware  that  I  run  great  danger  of  verifying 
Gay's  prediction.  Moreover,  it  is  quite  possible 
that  my  zeal  in  offering  aid  to  a  combatant  so 
extremely  well  able  to  take  care  of  himself  as  M. 
Reville  may  be  thought  to  savour  of  indiscretion. 
Two  considerations,  however,  have  led  me  to 
face  the  double  risk.  The  one  is  that  though,  in 
my  j  adgment,  M.  Reville  is  wholly  in  the  right  in 
that  part  of  the  controversy  to  which  I  propose 
to  restrict  my  observations,  nevertheless  he,  as  a 

*  The  Kineteenlh  Century. 


140  GENESIS  VERSUS  NATURE  iv 

foreigner,  has  very  little  chance  of  making  the 
truth  prevail  with  Englishmen  against  the  authority 
and  the  dialectic  skill  of  the  greatest  master  of  per- 
suasive rhetoric  among  English-speaking  men  of 
our  time.  As  the  Queen's  proctor  intervenes,  in 
certain  cases,  between  two  litigants  in  the  in- 
terests of  justice,  so  it  may  be  permitted  me  to  in- 
terpose as  a  sort  of  uncommissioned  science  proc- 
tor. My  second  excuse  for  my  meddlesomeness  is, 
that  important  questions  of  natural  science — 
respecting  which  neither  of  the  combatants  pro- 
fesses to  speak  as  an  expert — are  involved  in  the 
controversy ;  and  I  think  it  is  desirable  that  the 
public  should  know  what  it  is  that  natural  science 
really  has  to  say  on  these  topics,  to  the  best  belief 
of  one  who  has  been  a  diligent  student  of  natural 
science  for  the  last  forty  years. 

The  original  "  Prolegomenes  de  I'Histoire  des 
Beligions"  has  not  come  in  my  way;  but  I  have  read 
the  translation  of  M.  Reville's  work,  published  in 
England  under  the  auspices  of  Professor  Max 
Miiller,  with  very  great  interest.  It  puts  more 
fairly  and  clearly  than  any  book  previously  known 
to  me,  the  view  which  a  man  of  strong  religious 
feelings,  but  at  the  same  time  possessing  the 
information  and  the  reasoning  power  which  enable 
him  to  estimate  the  strength  of  scientific  methods 
of  inquiry  and  the  weight  of  scientific  truth,  may 
be  expected  to  take  of  the  relation  between  science 
and  religion. 


IV  GENESIS   VERSUS  NATURE  141 

In  the  chapter  on  "  The  Prhnitive  Revelation  " 
the  scientific  worth  of  the  account  of  the  Creation 
given  in  the  book  of  Genesis  is  estimated  in  terms 
which  are  as  unquestionably  respectful  as,  in  my 
judgment,  they  are  just ;  and,  at  the  end  of  the 
chapter  on  "  Primitive  Tradition,"  M.  Koville  ap- 
praises the  value  of  pentateuchal  anthropology  in 
a  way  which  I  should  have  thought  sure  of  en- 
listing the  assent  of  all  competent  judges,  even  if 
it  were  extended  to  the  whole  of  the  cosmogony 
and  biology  of  Genesis  : — 

As,  however,  the  original  traditions  of  nations  sprang  up  in 
an  epoch  less  remote  than  our  own  from  the  primitive  life,  it  is 
indispensable  to  consult  them,  to  compare  them,  and  to  associate 
them  with  other  sources  of  information  which  are  available. 
From  this  point  of  view,  the  traditions  recorded  in  Genesis  pos- 
sess, in  addition  to  their  own  peculiar  charm,  a  value  of  the 
highest  order  ;  but  we  cannot  ultimately  see  in  them  more  than 
a  venerable  fragment,  well-deserving  attention,  of  the  great 
genesis  of  mankind. 

Mr.  Gladstone  is  of  a  different  mind.  He  dis- 
sents from  M.  E-eville's  views  respecting  the  proper 
estimation  of  the  pentateuchal  traditions,  no  less 
than  he  does  from  his  interpretation  of  those 
Homeric  myths  which  have  been  the  object  of  his 
own  special  study.  In  the  latter  case,  Mr.  Glad- 
stone tells  M.  Reville  that  he  is  wrong  on  his 
own  authority,  to  which,  in  such  a  matter,  all  will 
pay  due  respect :  in  the  former,  he  affirms  himself 
to  be  "  wholly  destitute  of  that  kind  of  knowledge 
which    carries    authority,"    and     his    rebuke    is 


142  GENESIS  VERSUS   NATURE  rsr 

administered  in  the  name  and  by  the  authority  of 
natural  science. 

An  air  of  magisterial  gravity  hangs  about  the 
following  passage  : — 

But  the  question  is  not  here  of  a  lofty  poem,  or  a  skilfully 
constructed  naiTative  :  it  is  whether  natural  science,  in  the 
patient  exercise  of  its  high  calling  to  examine  facts,  finds  that 
the  works  of  God  cry  out  against  what  we  have  fondly  believed 
to  be  His  word  and  tell  another  tale  ;  or  whether,  in  this  nine- 
teenth century  of  Christian  progress,  it  substantially  echoes  back 
the  majestic  sound,  which,  before  it  existed  as  a  pursuit,  went 
forth  into  all  lands. 

First,  looking  largely  at  the  latter  portion  of  the  narrative, 
which  describes  the  creation  of  living  organisms,  and  waiving 
details,  on  some  of  which  (as  in  v.  24)  the  Septuagint  seems  to 
vary  from  the  Hebrew,  there  is  a  grand  fourfold  division,  set 
forth  in  an  orderly  succession  of  times  as  follows  :  on  the  fifth 
day 

1.  The  water-population  ; 

2.  The  air-population ; 
and,  on  the  sixth  day, 

3.  The  land-population  of  animals  ; 

4.  The  land-population  consummated  in  man. 

Now  this  same  fourfold  order  is  understood  to  have  been  so 
affirmed  in  our  time  by  natural  science,  that  it  may  be  taken  as 
a  demonstrated  conclusion  and  established  fact  (p.  696). 

*'  Understood  ? "  By  \yhom  ?  I  cannot  bring 
myself  to  imagine  that  Mr.  Gladstone  has  made  so 
solemn  and  authoritative  a  statement  on  a  matter 
of  this  importance  without  due  inquiry — without 
being  able  to  found  himself  upon  recognised  scien- 
tific authority.  But  I  wish  he  had  thought  fit  to 
name  the  source  from  whence  he  has  derived  his  in- 
formation, as,  in  that  case,  I  could  have  dealt  with 


IV  GENESIS  VERSUS   NATURE  143 

his  authority,  and  I  should  have  thereby  escaped 
the  appearance  of  making  an  attack  on  Mr.  Glad- 
stone himself,  which  is  in  every  way  distasteful  to 
me. 

For  I  can  meet  the  statement  in  the  last  para- 
graph of  the  above  citation  with  nothing  but  a 
direct  negative.  If  I  know  anything  at  all  about 
the  results  attained  by  the  natural  science  of  our 
time,  it  is  "  a  demonstrated  conclusion  and  estab- 
lished fact "  that  the  "  fourfold  order  "  given  by 
Mr.  Gladstone  is  not  that  in  which  the  evidence  at 
our  disposal  tends  to  show  that  the  water,  air,  and 
land-populations  of  the  globe  have  made  their 
ajDpearance. 

Perhaps  I  may  be  told  that  Mr.  Gladstone  does 
give  his  authority — that  he  cites  Cuvier,  Sir  John 
Herschel,  and  Dr.  Whewell  in  support  of  his  case. 
If  that  has  been  Mr.  Gladstone's  intention  in  men- 
tioning these  eminent  names,  I  may  remark  that, 
on  this  particular  question,  the  only  relevant 
authority  is  that  of  Cuvier.  But  great  as  Cuvier 
was,  it  is  to  be  remembered  that,  as  Mr.  Gladstone 
incidentally  remarks,  he  cannot  now  be  called  a 
recent  authority.  In  fact,  he  has  been  dead  more 
than  half  a  century ;  and  the  palaeontology  of  our 
day  is  related  to  that  of  his,  very  much  as  the 
geography  of  the  sixteenth  century  is  related  to 
that  of  the  fourteenth.  Since  1832,  when  Cuvier 
died,  not  only  a  new  world,  but  new  worlds,  of 
ancient  life  have  been  discovered  :  and  those  who 


144  GENESIS  VERSUS  NATURE  jy 

have  most  faithfully  carried  on  the  work  of  the 
chief  founder  of  palaeontology  have  done  most  to 
invalidate  the  essentially  negative  grounds  of  his 
speculative  adherence  to  tradition. 

If  Mr.  Gladstone's  latest  information  on  these 
matters  is  derived  from  the  famous  discourse  pre^ 
fixed  to  the  "  Ossemens  Fossiles,"  I  can  understand 
the  position  he  has  taken  up ;  if  he  has  ever  opened 
a  respectable  modern  manual  of  palaeontology,  or 
geology,  I  cannot.  For  the  facts  which  demolish 
his  whole  argument  are  of  the  commonest  noto- 
riety. But  before  proceeding  to  consider  the 
evidence  for  this  assertion  we  must  be  clear  about 
the  meaning  of  the  phraseology  employed. 

I  apprehend  that  when  Mr.  Gladstone  uses  the 
term  "  water-population  "  he  means  those  animals 
which  in  Genesis  i.  21  (Revised  Version)  are  spoken 
of  as  "  the  great  sea  monsters  and  every  living  crea- 
ture that  moveth,  which  the  waters  brought  forth 
abundantly,  after  their  kind."  And  I  presume  that 
it  will  be  agreed  that  whales  and  porpoises,  sea 
fishes,  and  the  innumerable  hosts  of  marine  inver- 
tebrated  animals,  are  meant  thereby.  So  "  air-pop- 
ulation "  must  be  the  equivalent  of '.'  fowl  "  in  verse 

20,  and  "  every  winged  fowl  after  its  kind,"  verse 

21.  I  suppose  I  may  take  it  for  granted  that  by 
*'  fowl "  we  have  here  to  understand  birds — at  any 
rate  primarily.  Secondarily,  it  may  be  that  the 
bats  and  the  extinct  pterodactyles,  which  were 
flying  reptiles,  come  under  the  same  head.      But 


rv  GENESIS  VERSUS   NATURE  145 

whether  all  insects  are  "  creeping  things  "  of  the 
land -population,  or  whether  flying  insects  arc  to  be 
included  under  the  denomination  of  "winged 
fowl,"  is  a  point  for  the  decision  of  Hebrew 
exegetes.  Lastly,  I  suppose  I  may  assume  that 
"  land-population  "  signifies  "  the  cattle  "  and  "  the 
beasts  of  the  earth,"  and  "  every  creeping  thing 
that  creepeth  upon  the  earth,"  in  verses  25  and  26 ; 
presumably  it  comprehends  all  kinds  of  terrestrial 
animals,  vertebrate  and  invertebrate,  except  such 
as  may  be  comprised  under  the  head  of  the  "  air- 
population." 

Now  what  I  want  to  make  clear  is  this  :  that  if 
the  terms  "water-population,"  "air-population," 
and  "land-population  "  are  understood  in  the  senses 
here  defined,  natural  science  has  nothing  to  say  in 
favour  of  the  proposition  that  they  succeeded  one 
another  in  the  order  given  by  Mr.  Gladstone  ;  but 
that,  on  the  contrary,  all  the  evidence  we  possess 
goes  to  prove  that  they  did  not.  Whence  it  will 
follow  that,  if  Mr.  Gladstone  has  interpreted 
Genesis  rightly  (on  which  point  I  am  most  anxious 
to  be  understood  to  offer  no  opinion),  that  inter- 
pretation is  wholly  irreconcilable  with  the  conclu- 
sions at  present  accepted  by  the  interpreters  of 
nature — with  everything  that  can  be  called  "a 
demonstrated  conclusion  and  established  fact "  of 
natural  science.  And  be  it  observed  that  I  am 
not  here  dealing  with  a  question  of  speculation, 
but  with  a  question  of  fact, 

99 


146  GENESIS  VERSUS   NATURE  iv 

Either  the  geological  record  is  sufficiently  com- 
plete to  afford  us  a  means  of  determining  tlie  order 
in  which  animals  have  made  their  appearance  on 
the  globe  or  it  is  not.  If  it  is,  the  determination 
of  that  order  is  little  more  than  a  mere  matter  of 
observation;  if  it  is  not,  then  natural  science 
neither  affirms  nor  refutes  the  "  fourfold  order," 
but  is  simply  silent. 

The  series  of  the  fossiliferous  deposits,  which 
contain  the  remains  of  the  animals  which  have 
lived  on  the  earth  in  past  ages  of  its  history,  and 
which  can  alone  afford  the  evidence  required  by 
natural  science  of  the  order  of  appearance  of  their 
different  species,  may  be  grouped  in  the  manner 
shown  in  the  left-hand  column  of  the  following 
table,  the  oldest  being  at  the  bottom  : — 

Formations  Firat  known  appearance  of 

Quaternary. 
Pliocene. 
Miocene. 

Eocene .  ,  ,        Vertebrate  aiV-population  (Bats). 

Cretaceous. 
Jurassic  .  ,        Vertebrate  air-population  (Birdsand 

Pterodactyles). 
Triassic. 

Upper  PalseozoTC. 

Middle    Palseozoic      ,         Vertebrate    Zawc^-population     (Am- 
phibia, Reptilia  [?]). 
Lower  Palseozoic. 

Silurian   .  ,        Vertebrate  zy^^gr-population  (Pishes), 

Invertebrate  air  and  Za?i(i- population 
(Flying  Insects  and  Scorpions). 
Cambrian  .         Invertebrate  tm^^cr-population  (much 

earlier,  if  Eozoon  is  animal). 


IV  GENESIS   VERSUS   NATURE  147 

In  the  right-hand  cokimn  I  have  noted  the  group 
of  strata  in  which,  according  to  our  present  infor- 
mation, the  land,  air,  and  ivater-^o^vXdiiioTis 
respectively  appear  for  the  first  time ;  and  in 
consequence  of  the  ambiguity  about  the  meaning 
of  "fowl,"  I  have  separately  indicated  the  first 
appearance  of  bats,  birds,  flying  reptiles,  and  flying 
insects.  It  will  be  observed  that,  if  "  fowl "  means 
only  "  bird,"  or  at  most  flying  vertebrate,  then  the 
first  certain  evidence  of  the  latter,  in  the  Jurassic 
epoch,  is  posterior  to  the  first  appearance  of  truly 
terrestrial  Amphibia,  and  possibly  of  true  reptiles, 
in  the  Carboniferous  epoch  (Middle  Palaeozoic)  by 
a  prodigious  interval  of  time. 

The  water-population  of  vertebrated  animals 
first  appears  in  the  Upper  Silurian.^  Therefore, 
if  we  found  ourselves  on  vertebrated  animals  and 
take  "  fowl  "  to  mean  birds  only,  or,  at  most,  flying 
vertebrates,  natural  science  says  that  the  order  of 
succession  was  water,  land,  and  air-population,  and 
not — as  Mr.  Gladstone, founding  himself  on  Genesis, 
says — water,  air,  land-population.  If  a  chronicler 
of  Greece  affirmed  that  the  age  of  Alexander  pre- 
ceded that  of  Pericles  and  immediately  succeeded 
that  of  the  Trojan  war,  Mr.  Gladstone  would  hardly 
say  that  this  order  is  "  understood  to  have  been  so 
affirmed  by  historical  science  that  it  may  be  taken 
as  a  demonstrated  conclusion  and  established  fact." 
Yet  natural  science  "  affirms  "  his  "  fourfold  order  " 
[^  Earlier,  if  more  recent  announcements  are  correct.] 


148  GENESIS   VERSUS  NATURE  iv 

to  exactly  the  same   extent — neither   more   nor 
less. 

Suppose,  however,  that  "  fowl "  is  to  be  taken 
to  include  flying  insects.  In  that  case,  the  first 
appearance  of  an  air-population  must  be  shifted 
back  for  long  ages,  recent  discovery  having  shown 
that  they  occur  in  rocks  of  Silurian  age.  Hence 
there  might  still  have  been  hope  for  the  fourfold 
order,  were  it  not  that  the  fates  unkindly  deter- 
mined that  scorpions  —  "  creeping  things  that 
creep  on  the  earth"  yar  excelleiice — turned  up  in 
Silurian  strata  nearly  at  the  same  time.  So  that, 
if  the  word  in  the  original  Hebrew  translated 
"fowl  "  should  really  after  all  mean  "  cockroach  " 
— and  I  have  great  faith  in  the  elasticity  of  that 
tono^ue  in  the  hands  of  Biblical  execretes — the  order 
primarily  suggested  by  the  existing  evidence — 

2.  Land  and  air-population ; 

1.  Water-population; 
and  Mr.  Gladstone's  order — 

3.  Land-population; 

2.  Air-population ; 

1.  Water-population; 
can  by  no  means  be  made  to  coincide.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  then,  the  statement  so  confidently 
put  forward  turns  out  to  be  devoid  of  foundation 
and  in  direct  contradiction  of  the  evidence  at 
present  at  our  disposal.^ 

^  It  may  be  objected  that  I  have  not  put  the  ease  fairly, 
inasmuch  as  the  solitary  insect's  wing  which  was  discovered 


IV  GENESIS  VERSUS  NATURE  149 

If,  stepping  beyond  that  which  may  be  learned 
from  the  facts  of  the  successive  appearance  of  the 
forms  of  animal  life  upon  the  surface  of  the  globe, 
in  so  far  as  they  are  yet  made  known  to  us  by 
natural  science,  we  apply  our  reasoning  faculties 
to  the  task  of  finding  out  what  those  observed 
facts  mean,  the  present  conclusions  of  the  inter- 
preters of  nature  appear  to  be  no  less  directly  in 
conflict  with  those  of  the  latest  interpreter  of 
Genesis. 

Mr.  Gladstone  appears  to  admit  that  there  is 
some  truth  in  the  doctrine  of  evolution,  and 
indeed  places  it  under  very  high  patronage. 

I  contend  that  evolution  in  its  highest  form  has  not  been  a 
thing  heretofore  unknown  to  history,  to  philosophy,  or  to  theo- 
logy. I  contend  that  it  was  before  the  mind  of  Saint  Paul 
when  he  taught  that  in  the  fulness  of  time  God  sent  forth 
His  Son,  and  of  Eusebius  when  he  wrote  the  "Preparation  for 
the  Gospel,"  and  of  Augustine  when  he  composed  the  *'  City  of 
God  "(p.  706). 

twelve  months  ago  in  Silurian  rocks,  and  which  is,  at  present,  the 
sole  evidence  of  insects  older  than  the  Devonian  epoch,  came 
from  strata  of  Middle  Silurian  age,  and  is  therefore  older  than 
the  scorpions  which,  within  the  last  two  years,  have  been  found 
in  Upper  Silurian  strata  in  Sweden,  Britain,  and  the  United 
States.  But  no  one  who  comprehends  the  nature  of  the  evidence 
aflbrded  by  fossil  remains  would  venture  to  say  that  the  non- 
discovery  of  scorpions  in  the  Middle  Silurian  strata,  up  to  this 
time,  affords  any  more  ground  for  supposing  that  they  did  not 
exist,  than  the  non-discovery  of  flying  insects  in  the  Upper 
Silurian  strata,  up  to  this  time,  throws  any  doubt  on  the  cer- 
tainty that  they  existed,  which  is  derived  from  the  occurrence 
of  the  wing  in  the  Middle  Silurian.  In  fact,  I  have  stretched  a 
point  in  idmitting  that  these  fossils  aff'ord  a  colourable  pretext 
for  the  assumption  that  the  land  and  air-population  were  of 
contemporaneous  origin. 


150  GENESIS  VERSUS  NATURE  iv 

Has  any  one  ever  disputed  the  contention,  thus 
solemnly  enunciated,  that  the  doctrine  of  evolu- 
tion Avas  not  invented  the  day  before  yesterday  ? 
Has  any  one  ever  dreamed  of  claiming  it  as  a 
modem  innovation  ?  Is  there  any  one  so  ignorant 
of  the  history  of  jDhilosophy  as  to  be  unaware  that 
it  is  one  of  the  forms  in  which  speculation  em- 
bodied itself  long  before  the  time  either  of  the 
Bishop  of  Hippo  or  of  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  ? 
Is  Mr.  Gladstone,  of  all  people  in  the  world, 
disposed  to  ignore  the  founders  of  Greek  philo- 
sophy, to  say  nothing  of  Indian  sages  to  whom 
evolution  was  a  familiar  notion  ages  before  Paul 
of  Tarsus  was  born  ?  But  it  is  ungrateful  to  cavil 
at  even  the  most  oblique  admission  of  the  possible 
value  of  one  of  those  affirmations  of  natural  science 
which  really  may  be  said  to  be  "  a  demonstrated 
conclusion  and  established  fact."  I  note  it  with 
pleasure,  if  only  for  the  purpose  of  introducing 
the  observation  that,  if  there  is  any  truth  what- 
ever in  the  doctrine  of  evolution  as  applied  to 
animals,  Mr.  Gladstone's  gloss  on  Genesis  in  the 
following  passage  is  hardly  happy : — 

God  created 

(a)  The  water- population  ; 

(b)  The  air-population. 

And  they  receive  His  benediction  (v.  20-23). 

6.  Pursuing  this  regular  progression  from  the  lower  to  the 
higher,  from  the  simple  to  the  complex,  the  text  now  givea 
us  the  work  of  the  sixth  "day,"  which  supplies  the  land  popu- 
lation, air  and  water  having  been  already  supplied  (pp.  695,  696). 


IV  GENESIS  VERSUS   NATURE  151 

The  gloss  to  which  I  refer  is  the  assumption 
that  the  "  air-population "  forms  a  term  in  the 
order  of  progression  from  lower  to  higher,  from 
simple  to  complex — the  place  of  Avhich  lies 
between  the  water-population  below  and  the  land- 
population  above — and  I  speak  of  it  as  a  "  gloss," 
because  the  pentateuchal  writer  is  nowise  respon- 
sible for  it. 

But  it  is  not  true  that  the  air-population,  as  a 
whole,  is  "  lower "  or  less  "  complex "  than  the 
land-population.  On  the  contrary,  every  beginner 
in  the  study  of  animal  morphology  is  aware  that 
the  organisation  of  a  bat,  of  a  bird,  or  of  a 
pterodactyle  presupposes  that  of  a  terrestrial  quad- 
ruped ;  and  that  it  is  intelligible  only  as  an 
extreme  modification  of  the  organisation  of  a 
terrestrial  mammal  or  reptile.  In  the  same  way 
winged  insects  (if  they  are  to  be  counted  among 
the  "air-population")  presuppose  insects  which 
were  wingless,  and,  therefore,  as  "  creeping  things," 
were  part  of  the  land-population.  Thus  theory  is 
as  much  opposed  as  observation  to  the  admission 
that  natural  science  endorses  the  succession  of 
animal  life  which  Mr.  Gladstone  finds  in  Genesis. 
On  the  contrary,  a  good  many  representatives  of 
natural  science  would  be  prepared  to  say,  on 
tlieoretical  grounds  alone,  that  it  is  incredible 
that  the  "  air-population  "  should  have  appeared 
before  the  "  land -population  " — and  that,  if  this 
assertion  is  to   be   found   in   Genesis,  it  merely 


152  GENESIS  VERSUS   NATURE  iv 

demonstrates  the  scientific  worthlessness  of  the 
story  of  which  it  forms  a  part. 

Indeed,  we  may  go  further.  It  is  not  even 
admissible  to  say  that  the  Vv^ater-population,  as  a 
whole,  appeared  before  the  air  and  the  land- 
populations.  According  to  the  Authorised  Version, 
Genesis  especially  mentions,  among  the  animals 
created  on  the  fifth  day,  "  great  whales,"  in  place 
of  which  the  Revised  Version  reads  "  great  sea 
monsters."  Far  be  it  from  me  to  give  an  opinion 
which  rendering  is  right,  or  whether  either  is 
right.  All  I  desire  to  remark  is,  that  if  whales 
and  porpoises,  dugongs  and  manatees,  arc  to  be 
regarded  as  members  of  the  water-population 
(and  if  they  are  not,  what  animals  can  claim  the 
designation  ?),  then  that  much  of  the  water-popu- 
lation has,  as  certainly,  originated  later  than  the 
land-population  as  bats  and  birds  have.  For  I 
am  not  aware  that  any  competent  judge  would 
hesitate  to  admit  that  the  organisation  of  these 
animals  shows  the  most  obvious  signs  of  their 
descent  from  terrestrial  quadrupeds. 

A  similar  criticism  applies  to  Mr.  Gladstone's 
assumption  that,  as  the  fourth  act  of  that  "  orderly 
succession  of  times"  enunciated  in  Genesis,  "the 
land-population  consummated  in  man." 

If  this  means  simply  that  man  is  the  final  term 
in  the  evolutional  series  of  which  he  forms  a  part, 
I  do  not  suppose  that  any  objection  will  be  raised 
to   that   statement   on   the   part   of  students   of 


IV  GENESIS   VERSUS   NATURE  153 

natural  science.  But  if  the  pentateuchal  author 
goes  further  than  this,  and  intends  to  say  that 
which  is  ascribed  to  him  by  Mr.  Gladstone,  I 
think  natural  science  will  have  to  enter  a  caveat. 
It  is  not  by  any  means  certain  that  man — I  mean 
the  species  Homo  sapiens  of  zoological  terminology 
■ — has  "  consummated  "  the  land-population  in  the 
sense  of  appearing  at  a  later  period  of  time  than 
any  other.  Let  me  make  my  meaning  clear  by 
an  example.  From  a  morphological  point  of  view, 
our  beautiful  and  useful  contemporary — I  might 
almost  call  him  colleague — the  horse  {Equus 
caballus),  is  the  last  term  of  the  evolutional  series 
to  which  he  belongs,  just  as  Homo  sapiens  is  the 
last  term  of  the  series  of  which  he  is  a  member. 
If  I  want  to  know  whether  the  species  Equus 
cabalhts  made  its  appearance  on  the  surface  of  the 
globe  before  or  after  Homo  sapiens,  deduction 
from  known  laws  does  not  help  me.  There  is  no 
reason,  that  I  know  of,  why  one  should  have 
appeared  sooner  or  later  than  the  other.  If  I 
turn  to  observation,  I  find  abundant  remains  of 
JEquus  caballus  in  Quaternary  strata,  perhaps  a 
little  earlier.  The  existence  of  Homo  sapiens  in 
the  Quaternary  epoch  is  also  certain.  Evidence 
has  been  adduced  in  favour  of  man's  existence  in 
the  Pliocene,  or  even  in  the  Miocene  epoch.  It 
does  not  satisfy  me ;  but  I  have  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  the  fact  may  be  so,  nevertheless. 
Indeed,  I  think  it  is  quite  possible  that  further 


154  GENESIS   VERSUS   NATURE  iv 

research  will  show  that  Homo  sajnens  existed,  not 
only  before  Fquus  caballus,  but  before  many  other 
of  the  existing  forms  of  animal  life  ;  so  that,  if  all 
the  species  of  animals  have  been  separately 
created,  man,  in  this  case,  would  by  no  means  be 
the  "  consummation  "  of  the  land-population. 

I  am  raising  no  objection  to  the  position  of  the 
fourth  term  in  Mr.  Gladstone's  "  order  " — on  the 
facts,  as  tiiey  stand,  it  is  quite  open  to  any  one  to 
hold,  as  a  pious  opinion,  that  the  fabrication  of  man 
was  the  acme  and  final  achievement  of  the  process 
of  peopling  the  globe.  But  it  must  not  be  said 
that  natural  science  counts  this  opinion  among  her 
"  demonstrated  conclusions  and  established  facts,'* 
for  there  would  be  just  as  much,  or  as  little,  reason 
for  ranging  the  contrary  opinion  among  them. 

It  may  seem  superfluous  to  add  to  the  evidence 
that  Mr.  Gladstone  has  been  utterly  misled  in  sup- 
posing that  his  interpretation  of  Genesis  receives 
any  support  from  natural  science.  But  it  is  as  well 
to  do  one's  work  thoroughly  while  one  is  about  it ; 
and  I  think  it  may  be  advisable  to  point  out  that 
the  facts,  as  they  are  at  present  known,  not  only 
refute  Mr.  Gladstone's  interpretation  of  Genesis  in 
detail,  but  are  opposed  to  the  central  idea  on  which 
it  appears  to  be  based. 

There  must  be  some  position  from  which  the 
reconcilers  of  science  and  Genesis  will  not  retreat, 
some  central  idea  the  maintenance  of  which  is  vital 
and  its  refutation  fatal.     Even  if  they  now  allow 


IV  GENESIS  VERSUS   NATURE  155 

that  the  y>^ords  "the  evening  and  the  morning" 
have  not  the  least  reference  to  a  natural  day,  but 
mean  a  period  of  any  number  of  millions  of  years 
that  may  be  necessary  ;  even  if  they  are  driven  to 
admit  that  the  word  "  creation,"  which  so  many 
millions  of  pious  Jews  and  Christians  have  held, 
and  still  hold,  to  mean  a  sudden  act  of  the  Deity, 
signifies  a  process  of  gradual  evolution  of  one 
species  from  another,  extending  through  immeasur- 
able time  ;  even  if  they  are  willing  to  grant  that 
the  asserted  coincidence  of  the  order  of  Nature  with 
the  "  fourfold  order  "  ascribed  to  Genesis  is  an  ob- 
vious error  instead  of  an  established  truth ;  they 
are  surely  prepared  to  make  a  last  stand  upon  the 
conception  which  underlies  the  whole,  and  which 
constitutes  the  essence  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  ''  fourfold 
division,  set  forth  in  an  orderly  succession  of  times." 
It  is,  that  the  animal  species  which  compose  the 
water-population,  the  air-population,  and  the  land- 
population  respectively,  originated  during  three 
distinct  and  successive  periods  of  time,  and  only 
during  those  periods  of  time. 

This  statement  appears  to  me  to  be  the  inter- 
pretation of  Genesis  which  Mr.  Gladstone  supports, 
reduced  to  its  simplest  expression.  "  Period  of 
time  "  is  substituted  for  "  day  "  ;  "  originated  "  is 
substituted  for  "created";  and  "any  order  re- 
quired "  for  that  adopted  by  Mr.  Gladstone.  It  is 
necessary  to  make  this  proviso,  for  if  "  day  "  may 
mean  a  few  million  years,  and  "  creation  "  may 


156  GENESIS   VERSUS   NATURE  TV 

mean  evolution,  then  it  is  obvious  that  the  order 

(1)  water- population,  (2)  air-population,  (3)  land- 
population,  may  also  mean  (1)  water-population, 

(2)  land-population,  (3)  air-population ;  and  it 
would  be  unkind  to  bind  down  the  reconcilers  to 
this  detail  when  one  has  parted  with  so  many 
others  to  oblige  them. 

But  even  this  sublimated  essence  of  the  penta- 
teuchal  doctrine  (if  it  be  such)  remains  as  discord- 
ant with  natural  science  as  ever. 

It  is  not  true  that  the  species  composing  any  one 
of  the  three  populations  originated  during  any  one 
of  three  successive  periods  of  time,  and  not  at  any 
other  of  these. 

Undoubtedly,  it  is  in  the  highest  degree  probable 
that  animal  life  appeared  first  under  aquatic  condi- 
tions ;  that  terrestrial  forms  appeared  later,  and 
flying  animals  only  after  land  animals  ;  but  it  is, 
at  the  same  time,  testified  by  all  the  evidence  we 
possess,  that  the  great  majority,  if  not  the  whole, 
of  the  primordial  species  of  each  division  have  long 
since  died  out  and  have  been  replaced  by  a  vast 
succession  of  new  forms.  Hundreds  of  thousands 
of  animal  species,  as  distinct  as  those  which  now 
compose  our  water,  land,  and  air-populations, 
have  come  into  existence  and  died  out  again, 
throughout  the  aeons  of  geological  time  which 
separate  us  from  the  lower  Palaeozoic  epoch,  when, 
as  I  have  pointed  out,  our  present  evidence  of  the 
existence  of  such  distinct  populations  commences. 


IV  GENESIS   VERSUS   NATURE  157 

If  the  species  of  animals  have  all  been  separately 
created,  then  it  follows  that  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  acts  of  creative  energy  have  occurred,  at  inter- 
vals, throughout  the  whole  time  recorded  by  the 
fossiliferous  rocks  ;  and,  during  the  greater  part  of 
that  time,  the  "  creation  "  of  the  members  of  the 
water,  land,  and  air-populations  must  have  gone 
on  contemporaneously. 

If  w^e  represent  the  water,  land,  and  air-popula- 
tions by  a,  hy  and  c  respectively,  and  take  vertical 
succession  on  the  page  to  indicate  order  in  time, 
then  the  following  schemes  will  roughly  shadow 
forth  the  contrast  I  have  been  endeavouring  to 
explain  : — 

Genesis  (as  interpreted  by  Nature  (as  interpreted  by 

Mr.  Gladstone).  natural  science). 

hhh  c^a^b^ 

ce  e  c  a"'  h'- 

aaa  b  a}  b 

a  a  a 

So  far  as  I  can  see,  there  is  only  one  resource 
left  for  those  modern  representatives  of  Sisyphus, 
the  reconcilers  of  Genesis  with  science  ;  and  it  has 
the  advantage  of  being  founded  on  a  perfectly 
legitimate  appeal  to  our  ignorance.  It  has  been 
seen  that,  on  any  interpretation  of  the  terms 
water-population  and  land-population,  it  must  be 
admitted  that  invertebrate  representatives  of  these 
populations  existed  during  the  lower  Palseozoic 
epoch.  No  evolutionist  can  hesitate  to  admit  that 
other  land  animals  (and  possibly  vertebrates  among 


158  GENESIS   VERSUS  NATURE  T7 

them)  may  have  existed  during  that  time,  of  the 
history  of  which  we  know  so  Httle ;  and,  further, 
that  scorpions  are  animals  of  such  high  organisa- 
tion that  it  is  highly  probable  their  existence 
indicates  that  of  a  long  antecedent  land-population 
of  a  similar  character. 

Then,  since  the  land-population  is  said  not  to 
have  been  created  until  the  sixth  day,  it  necessarily 
follows  that  the  evidence  of  the  order  in  which 
animals  appeared  must  be  sought  in  the  record  of 
those  older  Palaeozoic  times  in  which  only  traces  of 
the  water-population  have  as  yet  been  discovered. 

Therefore,  if  any  one  chooses  to  say  that  the 
creative  work  took  place  in  the  Cambrian  or 
Laurentian  epoch,  in  exactly  that  manner  which 
Mr.  Gladstone  does,  and  natural  science  does  not, 
affirm,  natural  science  is  not  in  a  position  to  dis- 
prove the  accuracy  of  the  statement.  Only  one 
cannot  have  one's  cake  and  eat  it  too,  and  such 
safety  from  the  contradiction  of  science  means  the 
forfeiture  of  her  support. 

Whether  the  account  of  the  work  of  the  first, 
second,  and  third  days  in  Genesis  would  be  con- 
firmed by  the  demonstration  of  the  truth  of  the 
nebular  hypothesis ;  whether  it  is  corroborated  by 
what  is  known  of  the  nature  and  probable  rela- 
tive antiquity  of  the  heavenly  bodies;  whether, 
if  the  Hebrew  word  translated  "firmament"  in 
the  Authorised  Version  really  means  "expanse," 
the  assertion  that  the  waters  are   partly  under 


rv  GENESIS  VERSUS   NATURE  159 

this  "expanse"  and  partly  above  it  would  be 
any  more  confirmed  by  the  ascertained  facts  of 
physical  geography  and  meteorology  than  it  was 
before;  whether  the  creation  of  the  whole  vege- 
table world,  and  especially  of  "grass,  herb  yielding 
seed  after  its  kind,  and  tree  bearing  fruit,"  before 
any  kind  of  animal,  is  "  affirmed "  by  the  ap- 
parently plain  teaching  of  botanical  palaeontology, 
that  grasses  and  fruit-trees  originated  long  sub- 
sequently to  animals — all  these  are  questions 
which,  if  I  mistake  not,  would  be  answered 
decisively  in  the  negative  by  those  who  are 
specially  conversant  with  the  sciences  involved. 
And  it  must  be  recollected  that  the  issue  raised 
by  Mr.  Gladstone  is  not  whether,  by  some  effort 
of  ingenuity,  the  pentateuchal  story  can  be  shown 
to  be  not  disprovable  by  scientific  knowledge,  but 
whether  it  is  supported  thereby. 

There  is  nothing,  then,  in  the  criticisms  of  Dr.  Reville  but 
what  rather  tends  to  confirm  than  to  impair  the  old-fashioned 
belief  that  there  is  a  revelation  in  the  book  of  Genesis  (p. 
694). 

The  form  into  which  Mr.  Gladstone  has  thought 
fit  to  throw  this  opinion  leaves  me  in  doubt  as  to 
its  substance.  I  do  not  understand  how  a  hostile 
criticism  can,  under  any  circumstances,  tend  to 
confirm  that  which  it  attacks.  If,  however,  Mr. 
Gladstone  merely  means  to  express  his  personal 
impression,  "  as  one  wholly  destitute  of  that  kind 
of  knowledge  which  carries  authority,"  that  he 


ICO  GENESIS   VERSUS  NATTEE  TV 

has  destroyed  the  value  of  these  criticisms,  I 
have  neither  the  wish  nor  the  right  to  attempt 
to  disturb  his  faith.  On  the  other  hand,  I  may 
be  permitted  to  state  my  own  couviction,  that, 
so  far  as  natural  science  is  involved,  M.  Re\iile's 
observations  retain  the  exact  value  they  possessed 
before  Mr.  Gladstone  attacked  them. 

Trustinor  that  I  have  now  said  enousrh  to  secure 
the  author  of  a  wise  and  moderate  disquisition 
upon  a  topic  which  seems  fated  to  stir  unwisdom 
and  fanaticism  to  their  depths,  a  fuller  measure 
of  justice  than  has  hitherto  been  accorded  to  him, 
I  retire  from  my  self-appointed  championship, 
with  the  hope  that  I  shall  not  hereafter  be  called 
upon  by  M.  R^ville  to  apologise  for  damage  done 
to  his  strong  case  by  imperfect  or  impulsive 
advocacy.  But,  perhaps,  I  may  be  permitted  to 
add  a  word  or  two,  on  my  own  account,  in 
reference  to  the  great  question  of  the  relations 
between  science  and  religion ;  since  it  is  one 
about  which  I  have  thoucrht  a  orood  deal  ever 
since  I  have  been  able  to  think  at  all;  and 
about  which  I  have  ventured  to  express  my 
views  publicly,  more  than  once,  in  the  course 
of  the  last  thirty  years. 

The  antacronism  between  science  and  relicnon, 
about  which  we  hear  so  much,  appears  to  me  to 
be  purely  factitious — fabricated,  on  the  one  hand, 
by  short-sighted  religious  people  who  confound  a 


rv  GEXESIS   VERSUS   NATURE  IGl 

cert^iin  branch  of  science,  theoloonr,  with  relisrion ; 
and,  on  the  other,  by  equally  short-sighted  scien- 
tific people  who  forget  that  science  takes  for  its 
province  only  that  which  is  susceptible  of  clear 
intellectual  comprehension ;  and  that,  outside  the 
boundaries  of  that  province,  they  must  be  con- 
tent with  imagination,  with  hope,  and  with 
ignorance. 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  moral  and  intellectual 
life  of  the  civilised  nations  of  Europe  is  the 
product  of  that  interaction,  sometimes  in  the  way 
of  antagonism,  sometimes  in  that  of  profitable 
interchange,  of  the  Semitic  and  the  Aryan  raceSy 
which  commenced  with  the  dawn  of  history,  when 
Greek  and  Phoenician  came  in  contact,  and  has 
been  continued  by  Carthaginian  and  Roman,  by 
Jew  and  Gentile,  down  to  the  present  day.  Our 
art  (except,  perhaps,  music}  and  our  science  are 
the  contributions  of  the  Aryan ;  but  the  essence 
of  our  religion  is  derived  from  the  Semite.  In 
the  eighth  century  B.C.,  in  the  heart  of  a  world 
of  idolatrous  polytheists,  the  Hebrew  prophets 
put  forth  a  conception  of  religion  which  appears 
to  me  to  be  as  wonderful  an  inspiration  of  genius 
as  the  art  of  Pheidias  or  the  science  of  Aristotle. 

"And  what  doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee,  but 
to  do  justly,  and  to  love  mercy,  and  to  walk 
humbly  with  thy  God  ? " 

If  any  so-called  religion  takes  away  fi-om  this 
great  saying  of  Micali,  I  think  it  wantonly  muti- 
100 


162  GENESIS  VERSUS   NATURE  IV 

lates,  while,  if  it  adds  thereto,  I  think  it  obscures, 
the  perfect  ideal  of  religion. 

But  what  extent  of  knowledge,  what  acuteness 
of  scientific  criticism,  can  touch  this,  if  any  one 
possessed  of  knowledge,  or  acuteness,  could  be 
absurd  enough  to  make  the  attempt  ?  Will  the 
progress  of  research  prove  that  justice  is  worth- 
less and  mercy  hateful;  will  it  ever  soften  the 
bitter  contrast  between  our  actions  and  our  as- 
pirations ;  or  show  us  the  bounds  of  the  universe, 
and  bid  us  say,  Go  to,  now  we  comprehend  the 
infinite  ?  A  faculty  of  wrath  lay  in  those  ancient 
Israelites,  and  surely  the  prophet's  staff  would 
have  made  swift  acquaintance  with  the  head  of 
the  scholar  who  had  asked  Micah  whether,  per- 
adventure,  the  Lord  further  required  of  him  an 
implicit  belief  in  the  accuracy  of  the  cosmogony 
of  Genesis ! 

What  we  are  usually  pleased  to  call  religion 
nowadays  is,  for  the  most  part,  Hellenised  Judaism; 
and,  not  unfrequently,  the  Hellenic  element  carries 
with  it  a  mighty  remnant  of  old-world  paganism 
and  a  great  infusion  of  the  worst  and  weakest 
products  of  Greek  scientific  speculaiion;  while 
fragments  of  Persian  and  Babylonian,  or  rather 
Accadian,  mythology  burden  the  Judaic  contri- 
bution to  the  common  stock. 

The  antagonism  of  science  is  not  to  religion, 
but  to  the  heathen  survivals  and  the  bad  philo- 
sophy under  which  religion  herself  is  often  well- 


IV         GENESIS  VERSUS  NATURE        163 

nigh  crushed.  And,  for  my  part,  I  trust  that 
this  antagonism  will  never  cease ;  but  that,  to 
the  end  of  time,  true  science  will  continue  to  fulfil 
one  of  her  most  beneficent  functions,  that  of 
relieving  men  from  the  burden  of  false  science 
which  is  imposed  upon  them  in  the  name  of 
religion. 

This  is  the  work  that  M.  Eeville  and  men  such 
as  he  are  doing  for  us ;  this  is  the  work  which  his 
opponents  are  endeavouring,  consciously  or  "uncon- 
sciously, to  hinder. 


V 

MR.  GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS 

[1886] 

In  controversy,  as  in  courtship,  the  good  old  iiile 
to  be  off  with  the  old  before  one  is  on  with  the 
new,  greatly  commends  itself  to  my  sense  of 
expediency.  And,  therefore,  it  appears  to  me 
desirable  that  I  should  preface  such  observations 
as  I  may  have  to  offer  upon  the  cloud  of  argu- 
ments (the  relevancy  of  which  to  the  issue  which 
I  -had  ventured  to  raise  is  not  always  obvious) 
put  forth  by  Mr.  Gladstone  in  the  January  num- 
ber of  this  review,^  by  an  endeavour  to  make 
clear  to  such  of  our  readers  as  have  not  had  the 
advantage  of  a  forensic  education  the  present  net 
result  of  the  discussion. 

I  am  quite  aware  that,  in  undertaking  this  task, 
I  run  all  the  risks  to  which  the  man  who  presumes 
to  deal  judicially  with  his  own   cause  is  liable. 
*   The  Nineteenth  Century,  1886. 


y  MR.   GLADSTONE   AND   GENESIS  1G5 

But  it  is  exactly  because  I  do  not  shun  that  risk, 
but,  rather,  earnestly  desire  to  be  judged  by  him 
who  Cometh  after  me,  provided  that  he  has  the 
knowledge  and  impartiality  appropriate  to  a  judge, 
that  I  adopt  my  present  course. 

In  the  article  on  "  The  Dawn  of  Creation  and 
Worship,"  it  will  be  remembered  that  Mr.  Glad- 
stone unreservedly  commits  himself  to  three 
propositions.  The  first  is  that,  according  to  the 
writer  of  the  Pentateuch,  the  "  water-population," 
the  "  air-population,"  and  the  "  land-population  " 
of  the  globe  were  created  successively,  in  the 
order  named.  In  the  second  place,  Mr.  Gladstone 
authoritatively  asserts  that  this  (as  part  of  his 
"  fourfold  order ")  has  been  "  so  affirmed  in  our 
time  by  natural  science,  that  it  may  be  taken  as 
a  demonstrated  conclusion  and  established  fact." 
In  the  third  place,  Mr.  Gladstone  argues  that  the 
fact  of  this  coincidence  of  the  pentateuchal  story 
with  the  results  of  modem  investigation  makes  it 
"  impossible  to  avoid  the  conclusion,  first,  that 
either  this  writer  was  gifted  with  faculties  passing 
all  human  experience,  or  else  his  knowledge  was 
divine."  And  having  settled  to  his  own  satisfac- 
tion that  the  first  "  branch  of  the  alternative  is 
truly  nominal  and  unreal,"  Mr.  Gladstone  continues, 
"  So  stands  the  plea  for  a  revelation  of  truth  from 
God,  a  plea  only  to  be  met  by  questioning  it3 
possibility"  (p.  697). 

I  am  a  simple-minded  person,  wholly  devoid  of 


166  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS  V 

subtlety  of  intellect,  so  that  I  willingly  admit  that 
there  may  be  depths  of  alternative  meaning  in 
these  propositions  out  of  all  soundings  attainable 
by  my  poor  plummet.  Still  there  are  a  good 
many  people  who  suffer  under  a  like  intellectual 
limitation ;  and,  for  once  in  my  life,  I  feel  that  I 
have  the  chance  of  attaining  that  position  of  a 
representative  of  average  opinion  which  appears  to 
be  the  modern  ideal  of  a  leader  of  men,  when  I 
make  free  confession  that,  after  turning  the 
matter  over  in  my  mind,  with  all  the  aid  derived 
from  a  careful  consideration  of  Mr.  Gladstone's 
reply,  I  cannot  get  away  from  my  original  convic- 
tion that,  if  Mr.  Gladstone's  second  proposition 
can  be  shown  to  be  not  merely  inaccurate,  but 
directly  contradictory  of  facts  known  to  every  one 
who  is  acquainted  with  the  elements  of  natural 
science,  the  third  proposition  collapses  of  itself. 

And  it  was  this  conviction  which  led  me  to 
enter  upon  the  present  discussion.  I  fancied  that 
if  my  respected  clients,  the  people  of  average 
opinion  and  capacity,  could  once  be  got  distinctly 
to  conceive  that  Mr.  Gladstone's  views  as  to  the 
proper  method  of  dealing  with  grave  and  difficult 
scientific  and  religious  problems  had  permitted 
him  to  base  a  solemn  "  plea  for  a  revelation  of  truth 
from  God  "  upon  an  error  as  to  a  matter  of  fact, 
from  which  the  intelligent  perusal  of  a  manual  of 
palaeontology  would  have  saved  him,  I  need  not 
trouble  myself  to  occupy  their  time  and  attention 


y  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND   GENESIS  167 

with  further  comments  upon  his  contribution  to 
apologetic  literature.  It  is  for  others  to  judge 
whether  I  have  efficiently  carried  out  my  project 
or  not.  It  certainly  does  not  count  for  much  that 
I  should  be  unable  to  find  any  flaw  in  my  own 
case,  but  I  think  it  counts  for  a  good  deal  that  Mr. 
Gladstone  appears  to  have  been  equally  unable  to 
do  so.  He  does,  indeed,  make  a  great  parade  of 
authorities,  and  I  have  the  greatest  respect  for 
those  authorities  whom  Mr.  Gladstone  mentions. 
If  he  will  get  them  to  sign  a  joint  memorial  to  the 
effect  that  our  present  palgeontological  evidence 
proves  that  birds  appeared  before  the  "  land-popu- 
lation "  of  terrestrial  reptiles,  I  shall  think  it  my 
duty  to  reconsider  my  position — but  not  till  then. 

It  will  be  observed  that  I  have  cautiously  used 
the  word  "  appears  "  in  referring  to  what  seems  to 
me  to  be  absence  of  any  real  answer  to  my 
criticisms  in  Mr.  Gladstone's  reply.  For  I  must 
honestly  confess  that,  notwithstanding  long  and 
painful  strivings  after  clear  insight,  I  am  still 
uncertain  whether  Mr.  Gladstone's  "Defence" 
means  that  the  great  "  plea  for  a  revelation  from 
God  "  is  to  be  left  to  perish  in  the  dialectic  desert ; 
or  whether  it  is  to  be  withdrawn  under  the 
protection  of  such  skirmishers  as  are  available 
for  covering  retreat. 

In  particular,  the  remarkable  disquisition  which 
covers  pages  11  to  14  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  last 
contribution    has    greatly    exercised    my    mind. 


168  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS  v 

Socrates  is  reported  to  have  said  of  the  works 
of  Heraclitus  that  he  who  attempted  to  com- 
prehend them  should  be  a  "Delian  swimmer," 
but  that,  for  his  part,  what  he  could  understand 
was  so  good  that  he  was  disposed  to  believe  in 
the  excellence  of  that  which  he  found  unin- 
telligible. In  endeavouring  to  make  myself 
master  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  meaning  in  these  pages, 
I  have  often  been  overcome  by  a  feeling  analo- 
gous to  that  of  Socrates,  but  not  quite  the  same. 
That  which  I  do  understand  has  appeared  to  me 
so  very  much  the  reverse  of  good,  that  I  have 
sometimes  permitted  myself  to  doubt  the  value 
of  that  which  I  do  not  understand. 

In  this  part  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  reply,  in  fact,  I 
find  nothing  of  which  the  bearing  upon  my  argu- 
ments is  clear  to  me,  except  that  which  relates  to 
the  question  whether  reptiles,  so  far  as  they  are 
represented  by  tortoises  and  the  great  majority  of 
lizards  and  snakes,  which  are  land  animals,  are 
creeping  things  in  the  sense  of  the  pentateuchal 
writer  or  not. 

I  have  every  respect  for  the  singer  of  the  Song 
of  the  Three  Children  (whoever  he  may  have 
been)  ;  I  desire  to  cast  no  shadow  of  doubt  upon, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  marvel  at,  the  exactness  of 
Mr.  Gladstone's  information  as  to  the  considera- 
tions which  "affected  the  method  of  the  Mosaic 
writer " ;  nor  do  I  venture  to  doubt  that  the 
inconvenient  intrusion  of  these  contemptible  rep- 


▼  MR.    GLADSTONE  AND   GENESIS  169 

tiles — "a  family  fallen  from  greatness"  (p.  14), 
a  miserable  decayed  aristocracy  reduced  to  mere 
"  skulkers  about  the  earth"  {ibid) — in  consequence, 
apparently,  of  difficulties  about  the  occupation  of 
land  arising  out  of  the  earth-hunger  of  their 
former  serfs,  the  mammals — into  an  apologetic 
argument,  which  otherwise  would  run  quite 
smoothly,  is  in  every  way  to  be  deprecated. 
Still,  the  wretched  creatures  stand  there,  im- 
portunately demanding  notice ;  and,  however 
different  may  be  the  practice  in  that  contentious 
atmosphere  with  which  Mr.  Gladstone  expresses 
and  laments  his  familiarity,  in  the  atmosphere  of 
science  it  really  is  of  no  avail  whatever  to  shut 
one's  eyes  to  facts,  or  to  try  to  bury  them  out  of 
sight  under  a  tumulus  of  rhetoric.  That  is  my 
experience  of  the  "Elysian  regions  of  Science,'' 
wherein  it  is  a  pleasure  to  me  to  think  that  a 
man  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  intimate  knowledge  of 
English  life,  during  the  last  quarter  of  a  century, 
believes  my  philosophic  existence  to  have  been 
rounded  off  in  unbroken  equanimity. 

However  reprehensible,  and  indeed  contempt- 
ible, terrestrial  reptiles  may  be,  the  only  question 
which  appears  to  me  to  be  relevant  to  my  argu- 
ment is  whether  these  creatures  are  or  are  not 
comprised  under  the  denomination  of  *'  everything 
that  creepeth  upon  the  ground." 

Mr.  Gladstone  speaks  of  the  author  of  the 
first  chapter  of  Genesis  as  "  the  Mosaic  writer " ; 


170  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND   GENESIS  v 

I  suppose,  therefore,  that  he  will  admit  that 
it  is  equally  proper  to  speak  of  the  author  of 
Leviticus  as  the  "  Mosaic  writer."  Whether  such 
a  phrase  would  be  used  by  any  one  who  had  an 
adequate  conception  of  the  assured  results  of 
modern  Biblical  criticism  is  another  matter; 
but,  at  any  rate,  it  cannot  be  denied  that 
Leviticus  has  as  much  claim  to  Mosaic  author- 
ship as  Genesis.  Therefore,  if  one  wants  to 
know  the  sense  of  a  phrase  used  in  Genesis,  it 
will  be  well  to  see  what  Leviticus  has  to  say 
on  the  matter.  Hence,  I  commend  the  follow- 
ing extract  from  the  eleventh  chapter  of 
Leviticus  to  Mr.  Gladstone's  serious  attention  : — 

And  these  are  they  Tvhich  are  unclean  unto  you  among  the 
creeping  things  that  creep  upon  the  earth  :  the  weasel,  and  the 
mouse,  and  the  great  lizard  after  its  kind,  and  the  gecko,  and 
the  land-crocodile,  and  the  sand-lizard,  ahd  the  chameleon. 
These  are  they  which  are  unclean  to  you  among  all  that  creep 
(v.  29-31). 

The  merest  Sunday-school  exegesis  therefore 
suffices  to  prove  that  when  the  **  Mosaic  writer  " 
in  Genesis  i.  24  speaks  of  "  creeping  things,"  he 
means  to  include  lizards  among  them. 

This  being  so,  it  is  agreed,  on  all  hands,  that 
terrestrial  lizards,  and  other  reptiles  allied  to 
lizards,  occur  in  the  Permian  strata.  It  is 
further  agreed  that  the  Triassic  strata  were 
deposited  after  these.  Moreover,  it  is  well 
known  that,  even  if  certain  footprints  are  to  be 


V  MR.   GLADSTONE   AND   GENESIS  171 

taken  as  unquestionable  evidence  of  the  exist- 
ence of  birds,  they  are  not  known  to  occur  in 
rocks  earlier  than  the  Trias,  while  indubitable 
remains  of  birds  are  to  be  met  Avith  only  much 
later.  Hence  it  follows  that  natural  science 
does  not  "  affirm "  the  statement  that  birds 
were  made  on  the  fifth  day,  and  "everything 
that  creepeth  on  the  ground"  on  the  sixth, 
on  which  Mr.  Gladstone  rests  his  order;  for, 
as  is  shown  by  Leviticus,  the  "  Mosaic  writer  " 
includes  lizards  among  his  "creeping  things." 

Perhaps  I  have  given  myself  superfluous 
trouble  in  the  preceding  argument,  for  I  find 
that  Mr.  Gladstone  is  willing  to  assume  (he  does 
not  say  to  admit)  that  the  statement  in  the 
text  of  Genesis  as  to  reptiles  cannot  "  in  all 
points  be  sustained  "  (p.  16).  But  my  position  is 
that  it  cannot  be  sustained  in  any  point,  so 
that,  after  all,  it  has  perhaps  been  as  well  to 
go  over  the  evidence  again.  And  then  Mr. 
Gladstone  proceeds  as  if  nothing  had  happened 
to  tell  us  that — 

There  remain  great  unshaken  facts  to  be  weighed.  First,  the 
iact  that  such  a  record  should  have  been  made  at  all. 

As  most  peoples  have  their  cosmogonies,  this 
"  fact "  does  not  strike  me  as  having  much  value. 

Secondly,  the  fact  that,  instead  of  dwelling  in  generalities,  it 
has  placed  itself  under  the  severe  conditions  of  a  chronological 
order  reaching  from  the  first  niseis  of  chaotic  matter  to  the 


172  MR.   GLADSTONE   AND  GENESIS  v 

consummated  production  of  a  fair  and  goodly,  a  furnished  and 
a  peopled  world. 

This  "fact"  can  be  regarded  as  of  value  only 
by  ignoring  the  fact  demonstrated  in  my  previous 
paper,  that  natural  science  does  not  confirm  the 
order  asserted  so  far  as  living  things  are  con- 
cerned ;  and  by  upsetting  a  fact  to  be  brought 
to  light  presently,  to  wit,  that,  in  regard  to  the 
rest  of  the  pentateuchal  cosmogony,  prudent 
science  has  very  little  to  say  one  way  or  the 
other. 

Thirdly,  the  fact  that  its  cosmogony  seems,  in  the  light  of  the 
nineteenth  cenriiry,  to  draw  more  and  more  of  countenance  from 
the  best  natural  philosophy. 

I  have  already  questioned  the  accuracy  of  this 
statement,  and  I  do  not  observe  that  mere  re- 
petition adds  to  its  value. 

And,  fourthly,  that  it  has  described  the  successive  origins  of 
the  five  great  categories  of  present  life  with  which  human  ex- 
perience was  and  is  conversant,  in  that  order  which  geological 
authority  confirms. 

By  comparison  with  a  sentence  on  page  14, 
in  which  a  fivefold  order  is  substituted  for  the 
"  fourfold  order,"  on  which  the  "  plea  for  reve- 
lation "  was  originally  founded,  it  appears  that 
these  five  categories  are  "plants,  fishes,  birds, 
mammals,  and  man,"  which,  Mr.  Gladstone 
affirms,  "  are  given  to  us  in  Genesis  in  the 
order  of  succession  in  which  they  are  also  giveu 
by  the  latest  geological  authorities." 


V  MR.   GLADSTONE   AND   GENESIS  173 

I  must  venture  to  demur  to  tliis  statement. 
I  showed,  in  my  previous  paper,  that  there  is 
no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  term  "  afreat  sea 
monster  "  (used  in  Gen.  i.  21)  includes  the  most 
conspicuous  of  great  sea  animals — namely,  whales, 
dolphins,  porpoises,  manatees,  and  dugongs;  ^  and, 
as  these  are  indubitable  mammals,  it  is  impossible 
to  affirm  that  mammals  come  after  birds,  which 
are  said  to  have  been  created  on  the  same  day. 
Moreover,  I  pointed  out  that  as  these  Cetacea 
and  Sirenia  are  certainly  modified  land  animals, 
their  existence  implies  the  antecedent  exist- 
ence of  land  mammals. 

Furthermore,  I  have  to  remark  that  the  term 
"  fishes,"  as  used,  technically,  in  zoology,  by  no 
means  covers  all  the  moving  creatures  that 
have  life,  which  are  bidden  to  "fill  the  waters 
in  the  seas"  (Gen.  i.  20-22.)  Marine  moUusks 
and  Crustacea,  echinoderms,  corals,  and  forami- 
nifera  are  not  technically  fishes.  But  they  are 
abundant  in  the  palaeozoic  rocks,  ages  upon 
ages  older  than  those  in  which  the  first  evi- 
dences of  true  fishes  appear.  And  if,  in  a 
geological  book,  Mr.  Gladstone  finds  the  quite 
true  statement  that  plants  appeared  before  fishes, 
it  is  only  by  a  complete  misunderstanding  that 
he  can  be  led  to  imagine  it  serves  his  purpose. 

^  Both  dolphins  and  dugongs  occur  in  the  Red  Sea,  porpoises 
and  dolphins  in  the  Mediterranean  ;  so  that  the  "Mosaio 
writer  "  may  well  have  been  acquainted  with  them. 


174  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS  v 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  at  the  present  moment, 
it  is  a  question  whether,  on  the  bare  evidence 
afforded  by  fossils,  the  marine  creeping  thing 
or  the  marine  plant  has  the  seniority.  No 
cautions  palaeontologist  would  express  a  decided 
opinion  on  the  matter.  But,  if  we  are  to  read 
the  pentateuchal  statement  as  a  scientific  docu- 
ment (and,  in  spite  of  all  protests  to  the  contrary, 
those  who  bring  it  into  comparison  with  science 
do  seek  to  make  a  scientific  document  of  it), 
then,  as  it  is  quite  clear  that  only  terrestrial 
plants  of  high  organisation  are  spoken  of  in  verses 
11  and  12,  no  palaeontologist  would  hesitate  to 
say  that,  at  present,  the  records  of  sea  animal  life 
are  vastly  older  than  those  of  any  land  plant 
describable  as  "  grass,  herb  yielding  seed  or  fruit- 
tree." 

Thus,  although,  in  Mr.  Gladstone's  "  Defence," 
the  "  old  order  passeth  into  new,"  his  case  is 
not  improved.  The  fivefold  order  is  no  more 
"affirmed  in  our  time  by  natural  science"  to 
be  "  a  demonstrated  conclusion  and  established 
fact"  than  the  fourfold  order  was.  Natural 
science  appears  to  me  to  decline  to  have  any- 
thing to  do  with  either;  they  are  as  wrong  in 
detail  as  they  are  mistaken  in  principle. 

There  is  another  change  of  position,  the  value 
of  which  is  not  so  apparent  to  me,  as  it  may 
well  seem  to  be  to  those  who  are  unfamiliar 
with  the  subject  under  discussion.    Mr.  Gladstone 


7  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS  175 

discards  his  thiee  groups  of  "water-population," 
*'  air-population,"  and  "  land-population,"  and  sub- 
stitutes for  them  (1)  fishes,  (2)  birds,  (3)  mam- 
mals, (4)  man.  Moreover,  it  is  assumed,  in  a 
note,  that  "  the  higher  or  ordinary  mammals " 
alone  were  known  to  the  "  Mosaic  writer  "  (p.  6). 
No  doubt  it  looks,  at  first,  as  if  something  were 
gained  by  this  alteration;  for,  as  I  have  just 
pointed  out,  the  word  "  fishes "  can  be  used  in 
two  senses,  one  of  which  has  a  deceptive  appear- 
ance of  adjustability  to  the  "  Mosaic "  account. 
Then  the  inconvenient  reptiles  are  banished  out 
of  sight ;  and,  finally,  the  question  of  the  exact 
meaning  of  "higher"  and  "ordinary"  in  the 
case  of  mammals  opens  up  the  prospect  of  a 
hopeful  logomachy.  But  what  is  the  good  of  it 
all  in  the  face  of  Leviticus  on  the  one  hand  and 
of  palaeontology  on  the  other  ? 

As,  in  my  apprehension,  there  is  not  a  shadow 
of  justification  for  the  suggestion  that  when  the 
pentateuchal  writer  says  "  fowl  "  he  excludes  bats 
(which,  as  we  shall  see  directly,  are  expressly 
included  under  "  fowl "  in  Leviticus),  and  as  I 
have  already  shown  that  he  demonstrably  includes 
reptiles,  as  well  as  mammals,  among  the  creeping 
things  of  the  land,  I  may  be  permitted  to  spare 
my  readers  further  discussion  of  the  "  fivefold 
order."  On  the  whole,  it  is  seen  to  be  rather 
more  inconsistent  with  Genesis  than  its  fourfold 
predecessor. 


176  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS  V 

But  I  have  yet  a  fresh  order  to  face.  Mr.  Glad- 
stone (p.  11)  understands  "the  main  statements  of 
Genesis  in  successive  order  of  time,  but  with- 
out any  measurement  of  its  divisions,  to  be  as 
follows : — 

1.  A  period  of  land,  anterior  to  all  life  (v.  9,  10), 

2.  A  period  of  vegetable  life,  anterior  to  animal  life  (v.  11, 

12). 

3.  A  period  of  animal  life,  in  the  order  of  fishes  (v.  20). 

4.  Another  stage  of  animal  life,  in  the  order  of  birds. 

5.  Another  in  the  order  of  beasts  (v.  24,  25). 

6.  Last  of  all,  man  (v.  26,  27). 

Mr.  Gladstone  then  tries  to  find  the  proof  of 
the  occurrence  of  a  similar  succession  in  sundry 
excellent  works  on  geology. 

I  am  really  grieved  to  be  obliged  to  say  that 
this  third  (or  is  it  fo\irth  ?)  modification  of  the 
foundation  of  the  "  plea  for  revelation  "  originally 
set  forth,  satisfies  me  as  little  as  any  of  its  pre- 
decessors. 

For,  in  the  first  place,  I  cannot  accept  the 
assertion  that  this  order  is  to  be  found  in  Genesis. 
With  respect  to  No.  5,  for  example,  I  hold,  as  I 
have  already  said,  that  *'  great  sea  monsters " 
includes  the  Cetacea,  in  wdiich  case  mammals 
(which  is  what,  I  suppose,  Mr.  Gladstone  means 
by  "  beasts  ")  come  in  under  head  No.  3,  and  not 
under  No.  5.  Again,  "  fowl "  are  said  in  Genesis 
to  be  created  on  the  same  day  as  fishes;  therefore 
I   cannot   accept    an    order    which   makes   birds 


V  MR.   GLADSTONE    AND  GENESIS  177 

succeed  fislies.  Once  more,  as  it  is  quite  certain 
that  the  term  "  fowl "  includes  the  bats, — for  in 
Leviticus  xi.  13-19  we  read,  "  And  these  shall  ye 
have  in  abomination  among  the  fowls  .  .  .  the 
heron  after  its  kind,  and  the  hoopoe,  and  the 
bat," — it  is  obvious  that  bats  are  also  said  to  have 
been  created  at  stage  No.  3.  And  as  bats  are 
mammals,  and  their  existence  obviously  presup- 
poses that  of  terrestrial  "  beasts,"  it  is  quite  clear 
that  the  latter  could  not  have  first  appeared  as 
No.  5.  I  need  not  repeat  my  reasons  for  doubting 
whether  man  came  "  last  of  all." 

As  the  latter  half  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  sixfold 
order  thus  shows  itself  to  be  wholly  unauthorised 
by,  and  inconsistent  with,  the  plain  language  of 
the  Pentateuch,  I  might  decline  to  discuss  the 
admissibility  of  its  former  half. 

But  I  will  add  one  or  two  remarks  on  this 
point  also.  Does  Mr.  Gladstone  mean  to  say  that 
in  any  of  the  w^orks  he  has  cited,  or  indeed  any- 
where else,  he  can  find  scientific  warranty  for  the 
assertion  that  there  was  a  period  of  land — by 
which  I  suppose  he  means  dry  land  (for  submerged 
land  must  needs  be  as  old  as  the  separate  exist- 
ence of  the  sea) — "  anterior  to  all  life  "  ? 

It  may  be  so,  or  it  may  not  be  so ;  but  where 
is  the  evidence  which  would  justify  any  one  in 
making  a  positive  assertion  on  the  subject  ?  "What 
competent  palaeontologist  will  affirm,  at  this 
present  moment,  that  he  knows  anything  about 

101 


178  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND   GENESIS  v 

the  period  at  which  life  originated,  or  will  assert 
more  than  the  extreme  probability  that  such 
origin  was  a  long  way  antecedent  to  any  traces  of 
life  at  present  known  ?  What  physical  geologist 
will  affirm  that  he  knows  when  dry  land  bogan  to 
exist,  or  will  say  more  than  that  it  was  probably 
very  much  earlier  than  any  extant  direct  evidence 
of  terrestrial  conditions  indicates  ? 

I  think  I  know  pretty  well  the  answers  which 
the  authorities  quoted  by  Mr.  Gladstone  would 
give  to  these  questions ;  but  I  leave  it  to  them  to 
give  them  if  they  think  fit. 

If  I  ventured  to  speculate  on  the  matter  at  all, 
I  should  say  it  is  by  no  means  certain  that  sea  is 
older  than  dry  land,  inasmuch  as  a  solid  terrestrial 
surface  may  very  well  have  existed  before  the 
earth  was  cool  enough  to  allow  of  the  existence  of 
fluid  water.  And,  in  this  case,  dry  land  may 
have  existed  before  the  sea.  As  to  the  first 
appearance  of  life,  the  whole  argument  of  analogy, 
whatever  it  may  be  worth  in  such  a  case,  is  in 
favour  of  the  absence  of  living  beings  until  long 
after  the  hot  water  seas  had  constituted  them- 
selves ;  and  of  the  subsequent  appearance  of 
aquatic  before  terrestrial  forms  of  life.  But 
whether  these  "protoplasts"  would,  if  we  could 
examine  them,  be  reckoned  among  the  lowest 
microscopic  algae,  or  fungi;  or  among  those  doubt- 
ful organisms  which  lie  in  the  debatable  land 
between  animals  and  plants,  is,  in  my  judgment, 


V  MR    GLADSTONE   AND  GENESIS  170 

a   question   on    which   a   prudent    biologist   will 
reserve  his  opinion. 

I  think  that  I  have  now  disposed  of  those  parts 
of  Mr.  Gladstone's  defence  in  which  I  seem  to 
discover  a  design  to  rescue  his  solemn  ''  plea  for 
revelation."  But  a  great  deal  of  th^  "  Proem  to 
Genesis  "  remains  which  I  would  gladly  pass  over 
in  silence,  were  such  a  course  consistent  with  the 
respect  due  to  so  distinguished  a  champion  of  the 
"  reconcilers." 

I  hoj^e  that  my  clients — the  people  of  average 
opinions — have  by  this  time  some  confidence  in 
me  ;  for  when  I  tell  them  that,  after  all,  Mr. 
Gladstone  is  of  opinion  that  the  "  Mosaic  record  " 
was  meant  to  give  moral,  and  not  scientific, 
instruction  to  those  for  whom  it  was  written,  they 
may  be  disposed  to  think  that  I  must  be  mis- 
leading them.  But  let  them  listen  further  to 
what  Mr.  Gladstone  says  in  a  compendious  but 
not  exactly  correct  statement  respecting  my 
opinions  : — 

He  holds  the  writer  responsible  for  scientific  precision  :  I  look 
for  nothing  of  the  kind,  but  assign  to  him  a  statement  general, 
which  admits  exceptions  ;  popular,  which  aims  mainly  at  pro- 
ducing moral  impression  ;  summary,  which  cannot  but  be  open 
to  more  or  less  of  criticism  of  detail.  He  thinks  it  is  a  lecture. 
I  think  it  is  a  sermon  (p.  6). 

I  note,  incidentally,  that  Mr.  Gladstone  appears 
to  consider  that  the  differentia  between  a  lecture 


180  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS  7 

and  a  sermon  is,  that  the  former,  so  far  as  it  deals 
with  matters  of  fact,  may  be  taken  seriously,  as 
meaning  exactly  what  it  says,  while  a  sermon  may 
not.  I  have  quite  enough  on  my  hands  without 
taking  up  the  cudgels  for  the  clergy,  who  will 
probably  find  Mr.  Gladstone's  definition  un- 
flattering. 

But  I  am  diverging  from  my  proper  business, 
which  is  to  say  that  I  have  given  no  ground  for 
the  ascription  of  these  opinions ;  and  that,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  I  do  not  hold  them  and  never  have 
held  them.  It  is  Mr.  Gladstone,  and  not  I,  who 
will  have  it  that  the  pentateuchal  cosmogony  is 
to  be  taken  as  science. 

My  belief,  on  the  contrary,  is,  and  long  has 
been,  that  the  pentateuchal  story  of  the  creation 
is  simply  a  myth.  I  suppose  it  to  be  an  hypo- 
thesis respecting  the  origin  of  the  universe  which 
some  ancient  thinker  found  himself  able  to  re- 
concile with  his  knowledge,  or  what  he  thought 
was  knowledge,  of  the  nature  of  things,  and 
therefore  assumed  to  be  true.  As  such,  I  hold  it 
to  be  not  merely  an  interesting,  but  a  venerable, 
monument  of  a  stage  in  the  mental  progress  of 
mankind ;  and  I  find  it  difficult  to  suppose  that 
any  one  who  is  acquainted  with  the  cosmogonies 
of  other  nations — and  especially  with  those  of  the 
Egyptians  and  the  Babylonians,  with  whom  the 
Israelites  were  in  such  frequent  and  intimate 
communication — should    consider    it    to    possess 


V  MR.   GLADSTONE    AND  GENESIS  181 

either  more,  or  less,  scientific  importance  than 
may  be  allotted  to  these. 

Mr.  Gladstone's  definition  of  a  sermon  permits 
me  to  suspect  that  he  may  not  see  much  difference 
between  that  form  of  discourse  and  what  I  call  a 
myth  ;  and  I  hope  it  may  be  something  more  than 
the  slowmess  of  apprehension,  to  which  I  have 
confessed,  which  leads  me  to  imagine  that  a 
statement  which  is  "  general "  but  "  admits  excep- 
tions," which  is  "  popular  "  and  "  aims  mainly  at 
producing  moral  impression,"  "summary"  and 
therefore  open  to  "  criticism  of  detail,"  amounts  to 
a  myth,  or  perhaps  less  than  a  myth.  Put 
algebraically,  it  comes  to  this,  x  =  a-{-h  -i-c;  always 
remembering  that  there  is  nothing  to  shoAV  the 
exact  value  of  either  a,  or  h,  or  c.  It  is  true  that 
a  is  commonly  supposed  to  equal  10,  but  there 
are  exceptions,  and  these  may  reduce  it  to  8,  or  3, 
or  0;  b  also  popularly  means  10,  but  being  chiefly 
used  by  the  algebraist  as  a  "  moral "  value,  you 
cannot  do  much  with  it  in  the  addition  or  subtrac- 
tion of  mathematical  values  ;  c  also  is  quite  "  sum- 
mary," and  if  you  go  into  the  details  of  which  it 
is  made  up,  many  of  them  may  be  wrong,  and  their 
sum  total  equal  to  0,  or  even  to  a  minus  quantity. 

Mr.  Gladstone  appears  to  wish  that  I  should  (1) 
enter  upon  a  sort  of  essay  competition  with  the 
author  of  the  pentateuchal  cosmogony  ;  (2)  that  I 
should  make  a  further  statement  about  some  ele- 
mentary facts  in  the  history  of  Indian  and  Greek 


182  MR.    GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS  v 

philosophy ;  and  (3)  that  I  should  show  cause  for 
my  hesitation  in  accepting  the  assertion  that 
Genesis  is  supported,  at  any  rate  to  the  extent  of 
the  first  two  verses,  hy  the  nebular  hypothesis. 

A  certain  sense  of  humour  prevents  me  from 
accepting  the  first  invitation.  I  would  as  soon 
attempt  to  put  Hamlet's  soliloquy  into  a  more 
scientific  shape.  But  if  I  supposed  the  "  Mosaic 
writer"  to  be  inspired,  as  Mr.  Gladstone  does,  it 
would  not  be  consistent  with  my  notions  of  respect 
for  the  Supreme  Being  to  imagine  Him  unable  to 
frame  a  form  of  words  which  should  accurately,  or, 
at  least,  not  inaccurately,  express  His  own  meaning. 
It  is  sometimes  said  that,  had  the  statements 
contained  in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  been 
scientifically  true,  they  would  have  been  unintel- 
ligible to  ignorant  people  ;  but  how  is  the  matter 
mended  if,  being  scientifically  untrue,  they  must 
needs  be  rejected  by  instructed  people  ? 

With  respect  to  the  second  suggestion,  it  would 
be  presumptuous  in  me  to  pretend  to  instruct  Mr. 
Gladstone  in  matters  which  lie  as  much  within  the 
province  of  Literature  and  History  as  in  that  of 
Science  ;  but  if  any  one  desirous  of  further  know- 
ledge will  be  so  good  as  to  turn  to  that  most 
excellent  and  by  no  means  recondite  source  of  in- 
formation, the  "  Encyclopaedia  Britannica,"  he  will 
find,  under  the  letter  E,  the  word  "  Evolution," 
and  a  long  article  on  that  subject.  Now,  I  do 
not  recommend  him  to  read  the  first  half  of  the 


V  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS  183 

article  ;  but  the  second  half,  by  my  friend  Mr. 
Sully,  is  really  very  good.  He  will  there  find 
it  said  that  in  some  of  the  philosophies  of  ancient 
India,  the  idea  of  evolution  is  clearly  expressed : 
"  Brahma  is  conceived  as  the  eternal  self-existent 
being,  which,  on  its  material  side,  unfolds  itself 
to  the  world  by  gradually  condensing  itself  to 
material  objects  through  the  gradations  of  ether, 
fire,  water,  earth,  and  other  elements."  And 
again :  "  In  the  later  system  of  emanation  of 
Sankhya  there  is  a  more  marked  approach  to  a 
materialistic  doctrine  of  evolution."  What  little 
knowledge  I  have  of  the  matter — chiefly  derived 
from  that  very  instructive  book,  *'  Die  Religion  des 
Buddha,"  by  C.  F.  Koeppen,  supplemented  by 
Hardy's  interesting  works — leads  me  to  think 
that  Mr.  Sully  might  have  spoken  much  more 
strongly  as  to  the  evolutionary  character  of  Indian 
philosophy,  and  especially  of  that  of  the  Budd- 
hists. But  the  question  is  too  large  to  be  dealt 
with  incidentally. 

And,  with  respect  to  early  Greek  philosophy,^ 
the  seeker  after  additional  enlightenment  need  go 
no  further  than  the  same  excellent  storehouse  of 
information : — 

The  early  Ionian  physicists,  including  Thales,  Anaximander, 
and  Anaximenes,  seek  to  explain  the  world  as  generated  out  of 

^  I  said  nothing  about  "  the  greater  number  of  schools  of 
Greek  philosophy,"  as  Mr.  Gladstone  implies  that  I  did,  but 
expressly  spoke  of  the  "founders  of  Greek  philosophy." 


184  MR.   GLADSTONE   AND   GENESIS  v 

a  primordial  matter  which  is  at  the  same  time  the  universal 
support  of  things.  This  substance  is  endowed  with  a  generative 
or  transmutative  force  by  virtue  of  which  it  passes  into  a 
succession  of  forms.  They  thus  resemble  modern  evolutionists, 
since  they  regard  the  world,  with  its  infinite  variety  of  forms,  as 
issuing  from  a  simple  mode  of  matter. 

Further  on,  Mr.  Sully  remarks  that  "  Heraclitus 
deserves  a  prominent  place  in  the  history  of  the 
idea  of  evolution,"  and  he  states,  with  perfect 
justice,  that  Heraclitus  has  foreshadowed  some  of 
the  special  peculiarities  of  Mr.  Darwin's  views.  It 
is  indeed  a  very  strange  circumstance  that  the 
philosophy  of  the  great  Ephesian  more  than  adum- 
brates the  two  doctrines  which  have  played  leading 
parts,  the  one  in  the  development  of  Christian 
dogma,  the  other  in  that  of  natural  science.  The 
former  is  the  concei3tion  of  the  Word  (X0709) 
which  took  its  Jewish  shape  in  Alexandria,  and 
its  Christian  form  ^  in  that  Gospel  which  is  usually 
referred  to  an  Ephesian  source  of  some  five 
centuries  later  date ;  and  the  latter  is  that  of  the 
struggle  for  existence.  The  saying  that  "  strife  is 
father  and  king  of  all "  (7roX6yLto9  iravnov  fiev  TTaTrjp 
io-ri,  irdvTwv  he  ^acnXevf;),  ascribed  to  Heraclitus, 
would  be  a  not  inappropriate  motto  for  the  "  Origin 
of  Species." 

I   have    referred   only   to    Mr.    Sully's   article, 

because  his  authority  is  quite   sufficient  for  my 

purpose.     But  the  consultation  of  any  of  the  more 

elaborate  histories  of  Greek  philosophy,    such  as 

1  See  Heinze,  Die  Lehre  vom  Logos,  p.  9  et  seq. 


V  MR.   GLADSTONE    AND   GENESIS  185 

the  great  work  of  Zeller,  for  example,  will  only 
brinof  out  the  same  fact  into  still  more  striking: 
prominence.  I  have  professed  no  "minute 
acquaintance  "  with  either  Indian  or  Greek  philo- 
sophy, but  I  have  taken  a  great  deal  of  pains  to 
secure  that  such  knowledge  as  I  do  possess  shall 
be  accurate  and  trustworthy. 

In  the  third  place,  Mr.  Gladstone  appears  to 
wish  that  I  should  discuss  with  him  the  question 
whether  the  nebular  hypothesis  is,  or  is  not,  con- 
firmatory of  the  pentateuchal  account  of  the 
origin  of  things.  Mr.  Gladstone  appears  to  be 
prepared  to  enter  upon  this  campaign  with  a  light 
heart.  I  confess  I  am  not,  and  my  reason  for  this 
backwardness  will  doubtless  surprise  Mr.  Glad- 
stone. It  is  that,  rather  more  than  a  quarter  of  a 
century  ago  (namely,  in  February  1859),  when  it 
was  my  duty,  as  President  of  the  Geological 
Society,  to  deliver  the  Anniversary  Address,^  I 
chose  a  topic  which  involved  a  very  careful  study 
of  the  remarkable  cosmogonical  speculation, 
originally  promulgated  by  Immanuel  Kant  and, 
subsequently,  by  Laplace,  which  is  now  known  as 
the  nebular  hypothesis.  With  the  help  of  such 
little  acquaintance  with  the  principles  of  physics 
and  astronomy  as  I  had  gained,  I  endeavoured  to 
obtain  a  clear  understanding  of  this  speculation  in 
all  its  bearincrs.  I  am  not  sure  that  I  succeeded  • 
but  of  this  I  am  certain,  that  the  problems  involved 
^  Reprinted  in  Lay  Sermons^  Addresses^  and  Lcvicivs^  1870. 


186  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS  V 

are  very  difficult,  even  for  those  who  possess  the 
intellectual  discipline  requisite  for  dealing  with 
them.  And  it  was  this  conviction  that  led  me  to 
express  my  desire  to  leave  the  discussion  of  the 
question  of  the  asserted  harmony  between  Genesis 
and  the  nebular  hypothesis  to  experts  in  the  appro- 
priate branches  of  knowledge.  And  I  think  my 
course  was  a  wise  one ;  but  as  Mr.  Gladstone 
evidently  does  not  understand  how  there  can  be 
any  hesitation  on  my  part,  unless  it  arises  from  a 
conviction  that  he  is  in  the  right,  I  may  go  so  far 
as  to  set  out  my  difficulties. 

They  are  of  two  kinds — exegetical  and  scientific. 
It  appears  to  me  that  it  is  vain  to  discuss  a  sup- 
posed coincidence  between  Genesis  and  science 
unless  we  have  first  settled,  on  the  one  hand,  what 
Genesis  says,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  what  science 
says. 

In  the  first  place,  I  cannot  find  any  consensus 
among  Biblical  scholars  as  to  the  meaning  of  the 
words,  "  In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heaven 
and  the  earth."  Some  say  that  the  Hebrew  word 
hara,  which  is  translated  "  create,"  means  "  made 
out  of  nothing."  I  venture  to  object  to  that 
rendering,  not  on  the  ground  of  scholarship,  but 
of  common  sense.  Omnipotence  itself  can  surely 
no  more  make  something  ''  out  of "  nothing  than 
it  can  make  a  triangular  circle.  What  is  intended 
by  "  made  out  of  nothing  "  appears  to  be  "  caused 
to  come  into  existence,"  with  the  implication  that 


V  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND   GENESIS  187 

nothing  of  the  same  kind  previously  existed.     It 
is  further  usually  assumed  that  "  the  heaven  and 
the  earth  "  means  the  material  substance  of  the 
universe.     Hence  the  "  Mosaic  writer "  is  taken 
to  imply  that  where  nothing  of  a  material  nature 
previously  existed,  this  substance  appeared.     That 
is  perfectly  conceivable,  and  therefore  no  one  can 
deny  that  it  may  have  happened.     But  there  are 
other  very  authoritative  critics  who  say  that  the 
ancient  Israelite  ^  who  wrote  the  passage  was  not 
likely    to   have   been   capable    of    such    abstract 
thinking ;  and  that,  as  a  matter  of  philology,  Im^a 
is  commonly  used  to  signify  the  "  fashioning,"  or 
*'  forming,"  of  that  which  already  exists.     Now  it 
appears  to  me   that  the  scientific  investigator  is 
wholly  incompetent  to  say  anything  at  all  about 
the  first  origin  of  the  material  universe.    The  whole 
power  of  his  organon  vanishes  when  he  has  to  step 
beyond  the  chain  of  natural  causes  and  effects. 
No  form  of  the  nebular  hypothesis,  that  I  know 
of,  is  necessarily  connected  with  any  view  of  the 
origination  of  the  nebular  substance.     Kant's  form 
of  it  expressly  supposes  that  tlie  nebular  material 
from   which   one   stellar   system   starts   may    be 
nothing    but    the    dismtegrated   substance   of    a 
stellar  and  planetary  system  which  has  just  come 

1  ** Ancient,"  doubtless,  but  his  antiquity  must  not  be 
exaggerated.      For     example,    there    is    no    proof    that    the 

iMosaic  cosmogony  v,-as  known  to  the  Israelites  of  Solomon's 
time. 


188  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND   GENESIS  V 

to  an  end.  Therefore,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  one  wlio 
believes  that  matter  has  existed  from  all  eternity 
has  just  as  much  right  to  hold  the  nebular  hypo- 
thesis as  one  who  believes  that  matter  came  into 
existence  at  a  specified  epoch.  In  other  words, 
the  nebular  hypothesis  and  the  creation  hypothesis, 
up  to  this  point,  neither  confirm  nor  oppose  one 
another. 

Next,  we  read  in  the  revisers'  version,  in  which 
I  suppose  the  ultimate  results  of  critical  scholar- 
ship to  be  embodied  :  "  And  the  earth  was  waste 
[  '  without  form/  in  the  Authorised  Version]  and 
void."  Most  people  seem  to  think  that  this 
phraseology  intends  to  imply  that  the  matter  out 
of  which  the  world  was  to  be  formed  was  a 
veritable  "  chaos,"  devoid  of  law  and  order.  If 
this  interpretation  is  correct,  the  nebular  hypo- 
thesis can  have  nothing  to  say  to  it.  The  scien- 
tific thinker  cannot  admit  the  absence  of  law 
and  order,  anywhere  or  anywhen,  in  nature. 
Sometimes  law  and  order  are  patent  and  visible  to 
our  limited  vision;  sometimes  they  are  hidden. 
But  every  particle  of  the  matter  of  the  most  fan- 
tastic-looking nebula  in  the  heavens  is  a  realm  of 
law  and  order  in  itself;  and,  that  it  is  so,  is  the 
essential  condition  of  the  possibility  of  solar  and 
planetary  evolution  from  the  apparent  chaos.^ 

1  "When  Jeremiah  (iv.  23)  says,  **  I  beheld  the  earth,  and,  lo, 
it  "was  waste  and  void,"  he  certainly  does  not  mean  to  imply 
that  the  form  of  the  earth  was  less  definite,  or  its  substance  less 
Bolid,  than  before. 


V  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND   GENESIS  189 

"  Waste  "  is  too  vague  a  term  to  be  worth  con- 
sideration. "  Without  form,"  intelligible  enough 
as  a  metaphor,  if  taken  literally  is  absurd  ;  for  a 
material  thing  existing  in  space  must  have  a  super- 
ficies, and  if  it  has  a  superficies  it  has  a  form. 
The  wildest  streaks  of  marestail  clouds  in  the  sky, 
or  the  most  irregular  heavenly  nebulae,  have 
surely  just  as  much  form  as  a  geometrical  tetra- 
hedron ;  and  as  for  "  void,"  how  can  that  be  void 
which  is  full  of  matter  ?  As  poetry,  these  lines 
are  vivid  and  admirable  ;  as  a  scientific  statement, 
which  they  must  be  taken  to  be  if  any  one  is 
justified  in  comparing  them  with  another  scientific 
statement,  they  fail  to  convey  any  intelligible 
conception  to  my  mind. 

The  account  proceeds :  "  And  darkness  was 
upon  the  face  of  the  deep."  So  be  it ;  but  where, 
then,  is  the  likeness  to  the  celestial  nebuloe,  of  the 
existence  of  which  we  should  know  nothing  unless 
they  shone  with  a  light  of  their  own  ?  "  And  the 
spirit  of  God  moved  upon  the  face  of  the  waters." 
I  have  met  with  no  form  of  the  nebular  hypothesis 
which  involves  anything  analogous  to  this  process. 

I  have  said  enough  to  explain  some  of  the  diffi- 
culties which  arise  in  my  mind,  when  I  try  to 
ascertain  whether  there  is  any  foundation  for  the 
contention  that  the  statements  contained  in  the 
first  two  verses  of  Genesis  are  supported  by  the 
nebular  hypothesis.  The  result  does  not  appear 
to  me  to  be  exactly  favourable  to  that  contention. 


190  MR.   GLADSTONE   AND   GENESIS  v 

The  nebular  hypothesis  assumes  the  existence  of 
matter,  having  definite  properties,  as  its  founda- 
tion. Whether  such  matter  was  created  a  few 
thousand  years  ago,  or  whether  it  has  existed 
through  an  eternal  series  of  metamorphoses  of 
which  our  present  universe  is  only  the  last  stage, 
are  alternatives,  neither  of  which  is  scientifically 
untenable,  and  neither  scientifically  demonstrable. 
But  science  knows  nothing  of  any  stage  in  which 
the  universe  could  be  said,  in  other  than  a  meta- 
phorical and  popular  sense,  to  be  formless  or 
empty ;  or  in  any  respect  less  the  seat  of  law  and 
order  than  it  is  now.  One  might  as  well  talk  of  a 
fresh-laid  hen's  egg  being  "  without  form  and  void," 
because  the  chick  therein  is  potential  and  not 
actual,  as  apply  such  terms  to  the  nebulous  mass 
which  contains  a  potential  solar  system. 

Until  some  further  enlightenment  comes  to  me, 
then,  I  confess  myself  wholly  unable  to  under- 
stand the  way  in  which  the  nebular  hypothesis  is 
to  be  converted  into  an  ally  of  the  "  Mosaic 
writer."  ^ 

^  In  looking  throngh  the  delightful  volume  recently  published 
by  the  Astronomer-Royal  for  Ireland,  a  day  or  two  ago,  I  find 
the  following  remarks  on  the  nebular  hypothesis,  which  I 
should  have  been  glad  to  quote  in  my  text  if  I  had  known  them 
sooner  : — 

"  Nor  can  it  be  ever  more  than  a  speculation  ;  it  cannot  be 
established  by  observation,  nor  can  it  be  proved  by  calculation. 
It  is  merely  a  conjecture,  more  or  less  plausible,  but  perhaps, 
in  some  degree,  necessarily  true,  if  our  present  laws  of  heat,  as 
we  understand  them,  admit  of  the  extreme  application  here 
required,  and  if  the  present  order  of  things  has  reigned  for 


▼  MR.   GLADSTONE   AND   GENESIS  191 

But  Mr.  Gladstone  informs  us  that  Professor 
Dana  and  Professor  Guyot  are  prepared  to  prove 
that  the  "  first  or  cosmogonical  portion  of  the 
Proem  not  only  accords  with,  but  teaches,  the 
nebular  hypothesis."  There  is  no  one  to  whose 
authority  on  geological  questions  I  am  more 
readily  disposed  to  bow  than  that  of  my  eminent 
friend  Professor  Dana.  But  I  am  familiar  with 
what  he  has  previously  said  on  this  topic  in  his 
well-known  and  standard  work,  into  which, 
strangely  enough,  it  does  not  seem  to  have 
occurred  to  Mr.  Gladstone  to  look  before  he  set  out 
upon  his  present  undertaking ;  and  unless  Pro- 
fessor Dana's  latest  contribution  (which  I  have 
not  yet  met  with)  takes  up  altogether  new  ground, 
I  am  afraid  I  shall  not  be  able  to  extricate  myself, 
by  its  help,  from  my  present  diflSculties. 

It  is  a  very  long  time  since  I  began  to  think 
about  the  relations  between  modern  scientifically 
ascertained  truths  and  the  cosmogonical  specula- 
tions of  the  writer  of  Genesis ;  and,  as  I  think  that 
Mr.  Gladstone  might  have  been  able  to  put  his 
case  with  a  good  deal  more  force,  if  he  had  thought 
it  worth  while  to  consult  the  last  chapter  of 
Professor  Dana's  admirable  "  Manual  of  Geology,'* 
so  I  think  he  might  have  been  made  aware  that 

sufficient   time   -without  the  intervention   of  any  influence  at 
present  known  to  us  "  {The  Story  of  the  Heavevs,  p.  506). 

Would  any  prudent  advocate  base  a  plea,  either  for  or  against 
revelation,  upon  the  coincidence,  or  want  of  coincidence,  of  the 
declarations  of  the  latter  with  the  requirements  of  an  hypothesis 
thus  guardedly  dealt  with  by  an  astronomical  expert  ] 


192  MR.  GLADSTONE   AND   GENESIS  V 

he  was  undertaking  an  enterprise  of  which  he  had 
not  counted  the  cost,  if  he  had  chanced  upon  a 
discussion  of  the  subject  which  I  published  in 
1877.1 

Finally,  I  should  like  to  draw  the  attention  of 
those  who  take  interest  in  these  topics  to  the 
weighty  words  of  one  of  the  most  learned  and 
moderate  of  Biblical  critics  : — 

A  pi'opos  de  cette  premiere  page  de  la  Bible,  on  a  coiitume  de 
nos  jours  de  disserter,  h,  perte  de  vue,  sur  I'accord  du  recit 
mosaique  avec  les  sciences  naturelles  ;  et  comnie  celles-ci, 
tout  eloignees  qu'elles  sont  encore  de  la  perfection  absolue,  ont 
rendu  populaires  et  en  quelque  sorte  irrefragables  un  certain 
nombie  de  faits  generaux  ou  de  theses  fondanientales  de  la 
cosuiologie  et  dela  geologie,  c'est  le  texte  sacre  qu'on  s'evertue 
k  torturer  pour  le  faire  concorder  avec  ces  donnees.^ 

In  my  paper  on  the  "  Interpreters  of  Nature 
and  the  Interpreters  of  Genesis,"  while  freely 
availing  myself  of  the  rights  of  a  scientific  critic,  I 
endeavoured  to  keep  the  expression  of  my  views 
well  within  those  bounds  of  courtesy  which  are 
set  by  self-respect  and  consideration  for  others.  I 
am  therefore  glad  to  be  favoured  w4th  Mr.  Glad- 
stone's acknowledgment  of  the  success  of  my 
efforts.  I  only  wish  that  I  could  accept  all  the 
products  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  gracious  appreciation, 
but  there  is  one  about  which,  as  a  matter  of 
honesty,  I  hesitate.     In  fact,  if  I  had  expressed  my 

1  Lectures  on  Evolution  delivered  in  New  York  (Americaa 
A.d(lresses). 

-  Reuss,  VEistoire  Sainte  et  la  Loi,  voL  i,  p.  275. 


V  MR.  GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS  193 

meaning  better  than  I  seem  to  have  done,  I  doubt 
if  this  particular  proffer  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  thanks 
would  have  been  made. 

To  my  mind,  whatever  doctrine  professes  to  be 
the  result  of  the  application  of  the  accepted  rules 
of  inductive  and  deductive  logic  to  its  subject- 
matter;  and  which  accepts,  within  the  limits  which 
it  sets  to  itself,  the  supremacy  of  reason,  is  Science. 
Whether  the  subject-matter  consists  of  realities  or 
unrealities,  truths  or  falsehoods,  is  quite  another 
question.  I  conceive  that  ordinary  geometry  is 
science,  by  reason  of  its  method,  and  I  also  believe 
that  its  axioms,  definitions,  and  conclusions  are 
all  true.  However,  there  is  a  geometry  of  four 
dimensions,  which  I  also  believe  to  be  science, 
because  its  method  professes  to  be  strictly  scientific. 
It  is  true  that  I  cannot  conceive  four  dimensions 
in  space,  and  therefore,  for  me,  the  whole  affair  is 
unreal.  But  I  have  known  men  of  great  intel- 
lectual powers  who  seemed  to  have  no  difficulty 
either  in  conceiving  them,  or,  at  any  rate,  in 
imagining  how  they  could  conceive  them ;  and, 
therefore,  four-dimensioned  geometry  comes  un- 
der my  notion  of  science.  So  I  think  astrology 
is  a  science,  in  so  far  as  it  professes  to  reason 
logically  from  principles  established  by  just  induc- 
tive methods.  To  prevent  misunderstanding,  per- 
haps I  had  better  add  that  I  do  not  believe  one 
whit  in  astrology  ;  but  no  more  do  I  believe  in 
Ptolemaic    astronomy,   or    in    the     catastrophic 

102 


194  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND  GENESIS  t 

geology  of  my  youth,  although  these,  in  their  day, 
claimed — and,  to  my  mind,  rightly  claimed — the 
name  of  science.  If  nothing  is  to  be  called  science 
but  that  which  is  exactly  true  from  beginning  to 
end,  I  am  afraid  there  is  very  little  science  in  the 
world  outside  mathematics.  Among  the  physical 
sciences,  I  do  not  know  that  any  could  claim  more 
than  that  it  is  true  within  certain  limits,  so  narrow 
that,  for  the  present  at  any  rate,  they  may  be 
neglected.  If  such  is  the  case,  I  do  not  see  where 
the  line  is  to  be  drawn  between  exactly  true, 
partially  true,  and  mainly  untrue  forms  of  science. 
And  what  I  have  said  about  the  current  theology 
at  the  end  of  my  paper  [sicjJi-a  pp.  160-163]  leaves, 
I  think,  no  doubt  as  to  the  category  in  which  I 
rank  it.  For  all  that,  I  think  it  would  be  not  only 
unjust,  but  almost  impertinent,  to  refuse  the  name 
of  science  to  the  "  Summa  "  of  St.  Thomas  or  to 
the  "  Institutes  "  of  Calvin. 

In  conclusion,  I  confess  that  my  supposed  "  un- 
jaded  appetite  "  for  the  sort  of  controversy  in  which 
it  needed  not  Mr.  Gladstone's  express  declaration 
to  tell  us  he  is  far  better  practised  than  I  am 
(though  probably,  without  another  express  de- 
claration, no  one  would  have  suspected  that  his 
controversial  fires  are  burning  low)  is  already 
satiated. 

In  "  Elysium  "  we  conduct  scientific  discussions 
in  a  different  medium,  and  we  are  liable  to  threat- 


V  MR.   GLADSTONE    AND   GENESIS  195 

enings  of  asphyxia  in  that  "  atmosphere  of  conten- 
tion "  in  which  Mr.  Gladstone  has  been  able  to 
live,  alert  and  vigorous  beyond  the  common  race 
of  men,  as  if  it  were  purest  mountain  air.  I  trust 
that  he  may  long  continue  to  seek  truth,  under 
the  difficult  conditions  he  has  chosen  for  the 
search,  with  unabated  energy — I  had  almost  said 
fire — 

May  age  not  wither  him,  nor  custom  stale 
His  infinite  variety. 

But  Elysium  suits  my  less  robust  constitution 
better,  and  I  beg  leave  to  retire  thither,  not  sorry 
for  my  experience  of  the  other  region — no  one 
should  regret  experience — but  determined  not  to 
repeat  it,  at  any  rate  in  reference  to  the  "  plea  for 
revelation." 

KOTE  ON  THE   PROPER    SeNSE    OF   THE  "  MOSAIC  "  NARRATIVE 

OF  THE  Creation. 

It  has  been  objected  to  my  argument  from  Leviticus  {suprd,  p. 
170)  that  the  Hebrew  words  translated  by  "  creeping  things  "  in 
Genesis  i.  24  and  Leviticus  xi.  29,  are  different ;  namely, 
*'  reh-mes"  in  the  former, "  sheh-retz  "  in  the  latter.  The  obvious 
reply  to  this  objection  is  that  the  question  is  not  one  of  words 
but  of  the  meaning  of  words.  To  borrow  an  illustration  from 
our  own  language,  if  ** crawling  things"  had  been  used  by  the 
translators  in  Genesis  and  "creeping  things"  in  Leviticus,  it 
would  not  have  been  necessarily  implied  that  they  intended  to 
denote  different  groups  of  animals.  "  Sheh-retz  "  is  employed  in 
a  wider  seuse  than  "reh-mes."     There  are  "sheh-retz"  of  the 


106  MR.   GLADSTONE   AND   GENESIS  v 

waters  of  the  earth,  of  the  air,  and  of  the  land.  Leviticus 
fipeaks  of  land  reptiles,  among  other  animals,  as  "sheh-retz"  ; 
Genesis  speaks  of  all  creeping  land  animals,  among  which  land 
reptiles  are  necessarily  included,  as  "reh-mes."  Our  trans- 
lators, therefore,  have  given  the  true  sense  when  they  render 
both  "sheh-retz"  and  "reh-mes"  by  "creeping  things." 

Having  taken  a  good  deal  of  trouble  to  show  what  Genesis 
i.-ii.  4  does  not  mean,  in  the  preceding  pages,  perhaps  it  may 
be  well  that  I  should  briefly  give  my  opinion  as  to  what  it  does 
mean.  I  conceive  that  the  unknown  authc4'  of  this  part  of  the 
Hexateuchal  compilation  believed,  and  meant  his  readers  to 
believe,  that  his  words,  as  they  understood  them — that  is  to  say, 
in  their  ordinary  natural  sense — conveyed  the  "  actual  historical 
truth."  When  he  says  that  such  and  such  things  happened,  I 
believe  liim  to  mean  that  they  actually  occurred  and  not  that  he 
imagined  or  dreamed  them  ;  when  he  says  "day,"  I  believe  he 
uses  the  word  in  the  popular  sense  ;  when  he  says  "  made"  or 
"created,"  I  believe  he  means  that  they  came  into  being  by  a 
process  analogous  to  that  which  the  people  whom  he  addressed 
called  "making"  or  "  creating";  and  I  think  that,  unless  we 
forget  our  present  knowledge  of  nature,  and,  putting  ourselves 
back  into  the  position  of  a  Phoenician  or  a  Chaldaean  philosopher, 
start  from  his  conception  of  the  world,  we  shall  fail  to  grasp  the 
meaning  of  the  Hebrew  writer.  We  must  conceive  the  earth  to 
be  an  immovable,  more  or  less  flattened,  body,  with  the  vault 
of  heaven  above,  the  watery  abyss  below  and  around.  We 
must  imagine  sun,  moon,  and  stars  to  be  "set"  in  a  "firma- 
ment" with,  or  in,  which  they  move  ;  and  above  which  is  yet 
another  watery  mass.  We  must  consider  "light"  and  "dark- 
ness "  to  be  things,  the  alternation  of  which  constitutes  day 
and  night,  independently  of  the  existence  of  sun,  moon,  and 
stars.  We  must  further  suppose  that,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
stoiy  of  the  deluge,  the  Hebrew  writer  was  acquainted  with  a 
Gentile  (probably  Cliald^an  or  Accadian)  account  of  the  origin 
of  things,  in  which  he  substantially  believed,  but  which  he 
stripped  of  all  its  idolatrous  associations  by  substituting 
"Elohim"  for  Ea,  Anu,  Bel,  and  the  like. 

From  this  point  of  view  the  first  verse  strikes  the  keynote 


V  MR.   GLADSTONE   AND   GENESIS  197 

of  the  whole.  In  the  beginning  "Elohim  ^  created  the  heaven 
and  the  earth."  Heaven  and  earth  were  not  primitive  existences 
from  which  the  gods  proceeded,  as  the  Gentiles  taught ;  on  the 
contrary,  the  "  Powers  "  preceded  and  created  heaven  and  earth. 
Whether  by  ' '  creation  "  is  meant ' '  causing  to  be  where  nothing 
was  before"  or  "shaping  of  something  which  pre-existed," 
seems  to  me  to  be  an  insoluble  question. 

As  I  have  pointed  out,  the  second  verse  has  an  interesting 
parallel  in  Jeremiah  iv.  23  :  "I  beheld  the  earth,  and,  lo,  it  was 
waste  and  void  ;  and  the  heavens,  and  they  had  no  light."  I 
conceive  that  there  is  no  more  allusion  to  chaos  in  the  one  than 
in  the  other.  The  earth-disk  lay  in  its  watery  envelope,  like 
the  yolk  of  an  egg  in  the  glairc,  and  the  spirit,  or  breath,  of 
Elohim  stirred  the  mass.  Light  was  created  as  a  thing  by 
itself ;  and  its  antithesis  "  darkness"  as  another  thing.  It  was 
supposed  to  be  the  nature  of  these  two  to  alternate,  and  a  pair 
of  alternations  constituted  a  **day"in  the  sense  of  an  unit  of 
time. 

The  next  step  was,  necessarily,  the  formation  of  that  "  firma- 
ment," or  dome  over  the  earth-disk,  which  was  supposed  to 
support  the  celestial  waters  ;  and  in  which  sun,  moon,  an^l  stars 
were  conceived  to  be  set,  as  in  a  sort  of  orrery.  The  earth  was 
still  suiTounded  and  covered  by  the  lower  waters,  but  the  upper 
were  separated  from  it  by  the  "  firmament,"  beneath  which  what 
we  call  the  air  lay.  A  second  alternation  of  darkness  and  light 
marks  the  lapse  of  time. 

After  this,  the  waters  which  covered  the  earth-disk,  under  the 
firmament,  were  drawn  away  into  certain  regions,  which  became 
seas,  while  the  part  laid  bare  became  dry  land.  In  accordance 
with  the  notion,  universally  accepted  in  antiquit}'',  that  moist 
earth  possesses  the  potentiality  of  giving  rise  to  living  beings, 
the  land,  at  the  command  of  Elohira,  "put  forth"  all  sorts  of 
plants.  They  are  made  to  appear  thus  early,  not,  I  apprehend, 
from  any  notion  that  plants  are  lower  in  the  scale  of  being  than 
animals  (which  would  seem  to  be  inconsistent  with  the  prevalence 
of  tree  worship   among   ancient    people),   but  rather  because 

^  For  the  sense  of  the  term  "Elohim,"  see  the  essay  entitled 
**  The  Evolution  of  Theology  "  at  the  end  of  this  volume. 


198  MR.   GLADSTONE   AND   GENESIS  v 

animals  obviously  depend  on  plants  ;  and  because,  without  crops 
and  harvests,  there  seemed  to  be  no  particular  need  of  heavenly 
signs  for  the  seasons. 

These  were  provided  by  the  fourth  day's  work.  Light 
existed  already  ;  but  now  vehicles  for  the  distribution  of  light, 
in  a  special  manner  and  with  varying  degrees  of  intensity,  were 
provided.  I  conceive  that  the  previous  alternations  of  light  and 
darkness  were  supposed  to  go  on;  but  that  the  "light"  was 
strengthened  during  the  daytime  by  the  sun,  which,  as  a  source 
of  heat  as  well  as  of  light,  glided  up  the  firmament  from  the 
east,  and  slid  down  in  the  west,  each  day.  Yery  probably  each 
day's  sun  was  supposed  to  be  a  new  one.  And  as  the  light  of 
the  day  was  strengthened  by  the  sun,  so  the  darkness  of  the 
night  was  weakened  by  the  moon,  which  regularly  waxed  and 
waned  every  month.  The  stars  are,  as  it  were,  thrown  in. 
And  nothing  can  more  sharply  mark  the  doctrinal  purpose  of 
the  author,  than  the  manner  in  which  he  deals  with  the 
heavenly  bodies,  which  the  Gentiles  identified  so  closely  with 
their  gods,  as  if  they  were  mere  accessories  to  the  almanac. 

Animals  come  next  in  order  of  creation,  and  the  general  notion 
of  the  jvriter  seems  to  be  that  they  were  produced  by  the  medium 
in  which  they  live  ;  that  is  to  say,  the  aquatic  animals  by  the 
waters,  and  the  terrestrial  animals  by  the  land.  But  there  was 
a  diflficulty  about  flying  things,  such  as  bats,  birds,  and  insects. 
The  cosmogonist  seems  to  have  had  no  conception  of  "air"  as 
an  elemental  body.  His  "  elements  "  are  earth  and  water,  and 
he  ignores  air  as  much  as  he  does  fire.  Birds  "fly  above  the 
earth  in  the  open  firmament"  or  "on  the  face  of  the  expanse" 
of  heaven.  They  are  not  said  to  fly  through  the  air.  The 
choice  of  a  generative  medium  for  flying  things,  therefore, 
seemed  to  lie  between  water  and  earth  ;  and,  if  we  take  into 
account  the  conspicuousness  of  the  great  flocks  of  water-birds 
and  the  swarms  of  winged  insects,  v.'hich  appear  to  arise  from 
water,  I  think  the  preference  of  water  becomes  intelligible. 
However,  I  do  not  put  this  forward  as  more  than  a  probable 
hypothesis.  As  to  the  creation  of  aquatic  animals  on  the  fifth, 
that  of  land  animals  on  the  sixth  day,  and  that  of  man  last  of 
all,  I  presume  the  order  was  determined  by  the  fact  that  maa 


T  MR.   GLADSTONE  AND   GENESIS  199 

could  hardly  receive  dominion  over  the  living  world  before  it 
existed  ;  and  that  the  ' '  cattle  "  were  not  wanted  until  he  was 
about  to  make  his  appearance.  The  other  terrestrial  animals 
would  naturally  be  associated  with  the  cattle. 

The  absurdity  of  imagining  that  any  conception,  analogous 
to  that  of  a  zoological  classification,  was  in  the  mind  of  the 
writer  will  be  apparent,  when  we  consider  that  the  fifth  day's 
work  must  include  the  zoologist's  Cetacca,  Sirenia,  and  seals,* 
all  of  which  are  Mammalia ;  all  birds,  turtles,  sea-snakes  and, 
presumably,  the  fresh  water  Bcptilia  and  AmpMhia ;  with  the 
great  majority  of  Invertcbrata. 

The  creation  of  man  is  announced  as  a  separate  act,  resulting 
from  a  particular  resolution  of  Elohim  to  "make  man  in  our 
image,  after  our  likeness."  To  learn  what  this  remarkable 
phrase  means  we  must  turn  to  the  fifth  chapter  of  Genesis, 
the  work  of  the  same  writer.  "  In  the  day  that  Elohim  created 
man,  in  the  likeness  of  Elohim  made  he  him  ;  male  and  female 
created  he  them  ;  and  blessed  them  and  called  their  name  Adam 
in  the  day  when  they  were  created.  And  Adam  lived  an  himdred 
and  thirty  years  and  begat  a  son  in  his  own  likeness,  after  his 
image  ;  and  called  his  name  Seth,"  I  find  it  impossible  to  read 
this  passage  without  being  convinced  that,  when  the  writer  says 
Adam  was  made  in  the  likeness  of  Elohim,  he  means  the  same 
sort  of  likeness  as  when  he  says  that  Seth  was  begotten  in  the 
likeness  of  Adam,  Whence  it  follows  that  his  conception  of 
Elohim  Avas  completely  anthropomorphic. 

In  all  this  narrative  I  can  discover  nothing  which  diff'eren- 
tiates  it,  in  principle,  from  other  ancient  cosmogonies,  except 
the  rejection  of  all  gods,  save  the  vague,  yet  anthropomorphic, 
Elohim,  and  the  assigning  to  them  anteriority  and  superiority 
to  the  world.  It  is  as  utterly  irreconcilable  with  the  assured 
truths  of  modern  science,  as  it  is  with  the  account  of  the  origin 
of  man,  plants,  and  animals  given  by  the  writer  of  the  second 
chief  constituent  of  the  Hexateuch  in  the  second  chapter  of 
Genesis.  This  extraordinary  story  starts  with  the  assumption 
of  the  existence  of  a  rainless  earth,  devoid  of  plants  and  herbs 

*  Perhaps  even  hippopotamuses  and  otters  I 


200  IMR.   GLADSTONE   AND  GENESIS  ^ 

of  the  field.  The  creation  of  living  beings  begins  with  that  of 
a  solitary  man  ;  the  next  thing  that  happens  is  the  laying  out 
of  the  Garden  of  Eden,  and  the  causing  the  growth  from  its  soil 
of  every  tree  "that  is  pleasant  to  the  sight  and  good  for  food  "  ; 
the  third  act  is  the  formation  out  of  the  ground  of  "  every  beast 
of  the  field,  and  every  fowl  of  the  air  "  ;  the  fourth  and  last, 
the  manufacture  of  the  first  woman  from  a  rib,  extracted  from 
Adam,  while  in  a  state  of  anaesthesia. 

Yet  there  are  people  who  not  only  profess  to  take  thia 
monstrous  legend  seriously,  but  who  declare  it  to  be  reconcil- 
able with  the  Elohistic  account  of  the  creation  I 


VI 


THE  LIGHTS  OF  THE  CHURCH  AND 
THE  LIGHT  OF  SCIENCE. 

[1890] 

There  are  three  ways  of  regarding  any  account  of 
past  occurrences,  whether  delivered  to  us  orally  or 
recorded  in  writing. 

The  narrative  may  be  exactly  true.  That  is  to 
say,  the  words,  taken  in  their  natural  sense,  and 
interpreted  according  to  the  rules  of  grammar,  may 
convey  to  the  mind  of  the  hearer,  or  of  the  reader 
an  idea  precisely  correspondent  with  one  which 
would  have  remained  in  the  mind  of  a  witness. 
For  example,  the  statement  that  King  Charles  the 
First  was  beheaded  at  Whitehall  on  the  30th  day 
of  January  1649,  is  as  exactly  true  as  any  pro- 
position in  mathematics  or  physics ;  no  one  doubts 
that  any  person  of  sound  faculties,  properly  placed, 
who  was  present  at  Whitehall  throughout  that 
day,  and  who  used  his  eyes,  would  have  seen  the 


202    LIGHTS   OF  THE   CHURCH  AND  SCIENCE        vi 

King's  head  cut  off;  and  that  there  would  have  re- 
mained in  his  mind  an  idea  of  that  occurrence 
which  he  would  have  j^ut  into  words  of  the  same 
value  as  those  which  we  use  to  express  it. 

Or  the  narrative  may  be  partly  true  and  partly 
false.  Thus,  some  histories  of  the  time  tell  us 
what  the  King  said,  and  what  Bishop  Juxon  said  ; 
or  report  royalist  conspiracies  to  effect  a  rescue  ;  or 
detail  the  motives  which  induced  the  chiefs  of  the 
Commonwealth  to  resolve  that  the  King  should 
die.  One  account  declares  that  the  King  knelt 
at  a  high  block,  another  that  he  lay  down  with 
his  neck  on  a  mere  plank.  And  there  are  contem- 
porary pictorial  representations  of  both  these  modes 
of  procedure.  Such  narratives,  while  veracious  as 
to  the  main  event,  may  and  do  exhibit  various 
degrees  of  unconscious  and  conscious  misrepre- 
sentation, suppression,  and  invention,  till  they 
become  hardly  distinguishable  from  pure  fictions. 
Thus,  they  present  a  transition  to  narratives  of  a 
third  class,  in  which  the  fictitious  element  pre- 
dominates. Here,  again,  there  are  all  imaginable 
gradations,  from  such  works  as  Defoe's  quasi- 
historical  account  of  the  Plague  year,  which  prob- 
ably gives  a  truer  conception  of  that  dreadful  time 
than  any  authentic  history,  through  the  historical 
novel,  drama,  and  epic,  to  the  purely  phantasmal 
creations  of  imaginative  genius,  such  as  the  old 
"  Arabian  Nights "  or  the  modern  "  Shaving  of 
Shagpat."    It  is  not  strictly  needful  for  my  present 


TI         LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHURCH   AND   SCIENCE   203 

purpose  that  I  should  say  anything  about  narratives 
which  are  professedly  fictitious.  Yet  it  may  be 
well,  perhaps,  if  I  disclaim  any  intention  of  dero- 
gating from  their  value,  when  I  insist  upon  the 
paramount  necessity  of  recollecting  that  there  is 
no  sort  of  relation  between  the  ethical,  or  the 
aesthetic,  or  even  the  scientific  importance  of  such 
works,  and  their  worth  as  historical  documents. 
Unquestionably,  to  the  poetic  artist,  or  even  to  the 
student  of  psychology,  "  Hamlet "  and  "  Macbeth  '* 
may  be  better  instructors  than  all  the  books  of  a 
wilderness  of  professors  of  sesthetics  or  of  moral 
philosophy.  But,  as  evidence  of  occurrences  in 
Denmark,  or  in  Scotland,  at  the  times  and  places 
indicated,  they  are  out  of  court ;  the  profoundest 
admiration  for  them,  the  deepest  gratitude  for  their 
influence,  are  consistent  with  the  knowledge  that, 
historically  speaking,  they  are  worthless  fables,  in 
which  any  foundation  of  reality  that  may  exist  is 
submerged  beneath  the  imaginative  superstructure. 
At  present,  however,  I  am  not  concerned  to 
dwell  upon  the  importance  of  fictitious  literature 
and  the  immensity  of  the  work  which  it  has 
effected  in  the  education  of  the  hujnan  race.  I 
propose  to  deal  with  the  much  more  limited  in- 
quiry :  Are  there  two  other  classes  of  consecutive^ 
narratives  (as  distinct  from  statements  of  in- 
dividual facts),  or  only  one  ?  Is  there  any  known 
historical  work  which  is  throughout  exactly  true, 
or  is  there  not  ?     In  the  case  of  the  great  majority 


204    LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHURCH  AND  SCIENCE        vi 

of  histories  the  answer  is  not  doubtful :  they  are  all 
only  partially  true.  Even  those  venerable  works 
which  bear  the  names  of  some  of  the  greatest  of 
ancient  Greek  and  Roman  writers,  and  which  have 
been  accepted  by  generation  after  generation,  down 
to  modern  times,  as  stores  of  unquestionable  truth, 
have  been  compelled  by  scientific  criticism,  after 
a  long  battle,  to  descend  to  the  common  level,  and 
to  confess  to  a  large  admixture  of  error.  I  might 
fairly  take  this  for  granted ;  but  it  may  be  well 
that  I  should  entrench  myself  behind  the  very 
apposite  words  of  a  historical  authority  who  is  cer- 
tainly not  obnoxious  to  even  a  suspicion  of  sceijti- 
cal  tendencies. 

Time  was — and  that  not  very  long  ago — when  all  the  rela- 
tions of  ancient  authors  concerning  the  old  world  were  received 
with  a  ready  belief  ;  and  an  unreasoning  and  uncritical  faith 
accepted  with  equal  satisfaction  the  narrative  of  the  campaigns 
of  Caesar  and  of  the  doings  of  Komulus,  the  account  of  Alex- 
ander's marches  and  of  the  conquests  of  Semiramis.  We  can 
most  of  us  remember  when,  in  this  country,  the  whole  story  of 
regal  Rome,  and  even  the  legend  of  the  Trojan  settlement  in 
Latium,  were  seriously  placed  before  boys  as  history,  and  dis- 
coursed of  as  unhesitatingly  and  in  as  dogmatic  a  tone  as  the 
tale  of  the  Catiline  Conspiracy  or  the  Conijucst  of  Britain.     .     . 

But  all  this  is  now  changed.  The  last  century  has  seen  the 
birth  and  growth  of  a  new  science — the  Science  of  Historical 
Criticism.  .  .  .  The  whole  world  of  profane  history  has 
been  revolutionised.     .     .     .^ 

^ Bampton  Lectures  {1859),  on  "The  Historical  Evidences  of 
the  Truth  of  the  Scripture  Records  stated  anew,  with  Special 
Reference  to  the  Doubts  and  Discoveries  of  Modern  Times,"  by 
the  Rev.  G.  Rawlinson,  M.A.,  pp.  5-6. 


VI         LIGHTS  OF   THE   CHUKCH  AND  Sr^IENCE   205 

If  these  utterances  were  true  when  they  fell  from 
the  lips  of  a  Bampton  lecturer  in  1859,  witt  how 
much  greater  force  do  they  appeal  to  us  now,  wijen 
the  immense  labours  of  the  generation  now  passing 
away  constitute  one  vast  illustration  of  the  power 
and  fruitfulness  of  scientific  methods  of  investiga- 
tion in  history,  no  less  than  in  all  other  depart- 
ments of  knowledge. 

At  the  present  time,  I  suppose,  there  is  no  one 
who  doubts  that  histories  which  appertain  to  any 
other  people  than  the  Jews,  and  their  spiritual 
progeny  in  the  first  century,  fall  within  the  second 
class  of  the  three  enumerated.  Like  Goethe's 
Autobiography,  they  might  allbe  entitled  "  Wahrheit 
und  Dichtung"— "  Truth  and  Fiction."  The  pro- 
portion of  the  two  constituents  changes  indefinitely; 
and  the  quality  of  the  fiction  varies  through  the 
whole  gamut  of  unveracity.  But  "  Dichtung  "  is 
always  there.  For  the  most  acute  and  learned  of 
historians  cannot  remedy  the  imperfections  of  his 
sources  of  information ;  nor  can  the  most  impartial 
wholly  escape  the  influence  of  the  "personal 
equation  "  generated  by  his  temperament  and  by 
his  education.  Therefore,  from  the  narratives  of 
Herodotus  to  those  set  forth  in  yesterday's  "Times," 
all  history  is  to  be  read  subject  to  the  warning  that 
fiction  has  its  share  therein.  The  modern  vast 
development  of  fugitive  literature  cannot  be  the 
unmitigated  evil  that  some  do  vainly  say  it  is, 
since  it  has  put  an  end  to  the  popular  delusion  of 


206    LIGHTS   OF  THE   CHURCH  AND   SCIENCE        vi 

less  press-ridden  times,  that  what  appears  ia  print 
must  be  true.  We  should  rather  hope  that  some 
beneficent  influence  may  create  among  the  erudite 
a  like  healthy  suspicion  of  manuscripts  and  in- 
scri23tions,  however  ancient ;  for  a  bulletin  may  lie, 
even  though  it  be  written  in  cuneiform  characters. 
Hotspur's  starling,  that  was  to  be  taught  to  speak 
nothing  but  "  Mortimer "  into  the  ears  of  King 
Henry  the  Fourth,  might  be  a  useful  inmate  of 
every  historian's  library,  if  "  Fiction  "  were  sub- 
stituted for  the  name  of  Harry  Percy's  friend. 

But  it  was  the  chief  object  of  the  lecturer  to 
the  congregation  gathered  in  St.  Mary's,  Oxford, 
thirty-one  years  ago,  to  prove  to  them,  by 
evidence  gathered  with  no  little  labour  and 
marshalled  with  much  skill,  that  one  group  of 
historical  works  was  exempt  from  the  general 
rule  ;  and  that  the  narratives  contained  in  the 
canonical  Scriptures  are  free  from  any  admixture 
of  error.  With  justice  and  candour,  the  lecturer 
impresses  upon  his  hearers  that  the  special 
distinction  of  Christianity,  among  the  religions 
of  the  world,  lies  in  its  claim  to  be  historical ;  to 
be  surely  founded  upon  events  which  have 
happened,  exactly  as  they  are  declared  to  have 
happened  in  its  sacred  books ;  which  are  true, 
that  is,  in  the  sense  that  the  statement  about 
the  execution  of  Charles  the  First  is  true. 
Further,  it  is  affirmed  that  the  New  Testament 
presupposes  the  historical  exactness  of  the  Old 


VI         LIGHTS   OF   THE  CHURCH  AND   SCIENCE   207 

Testament ;  that  the  points  of  contact  of  "  sacred  " 
and  "  profane "  history  are  innumerable ;  and 
that  the  demonstration  of  the  falsity  of  the 
Hebrew  records,  especially  in  regard  to  those 
narratives  which  are  assumed  to  be  true  in  the 
New  Testament,  would  be  fatal  to  Christian 
theology. 

My  utmost  ingenuity  does  not  enable  me  to 
discover  a  flaw  in  the  argument  thus  briefly 
summarised.  I  am  fairly  at  a  loss  to  comprehend 
how  any  one,  for  a  moment,  can  doubt  that 
Christian  theology  must  stand  or  fall  with  the 
historical  trustworthiness  of  the  Jewish  Scrip- 
tures. The  very  conception  of  the  Messiah,  or 
Christ,  is  inextricably  interwoven  with  Jewish 
history;  the  identification  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
with  that  Messiah  rests  upon  the  interpretation 
of  passages  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  which  have 
no  evidential  value  unless  they  possess  the 
historical  character  assigned  to  them.  If  the 
covenant  with  Abraham  was  not  made  ;  if  circum- 
cision and  sacrifices  were  not  ordained  by  Jahveh ; 
if  the  "  ten  words "  were  not  written  by  God's 
hand  on  the  stone  tables ;  if  Abraham  is  more  or 
less  a  mythical  hero,  such  as  Theseus ;  the  story 
of  the  Deluge  a  fiction ;  that  of  the  Fall  a  legend  ; 
and  that  of  the  Creation  the  dream  of  a  seer ;  if 
all  these  definite  and  detailed  narratives  of 
apparently  real  events  have  no  more  value  as 
history  than  have  the  stories  of  the  regal  period 


208     LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHURCH  AND  SCIENCE       vi 

of  Rome — what  is  to  be  said  about  the  Messianic 
doctrine,  which  is  so  much  less  clearly  enunciated  ? 
And  what  about  the  authority  of  the  writers  of 
the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  who,  on  this 
theory,  have  not  merely  accepted  flimsy  fictions 
for  solid  truths,  but  have  built  the  very  foun- 
dations of  Christian  dogma  upon  legendary 
quicksands  ? 

But  these  may  be  said  to  be  merely  the 
carpings  of  that  carnal  reason  which  the  profane 
call  common  sense  ;  I  hasten,  therefore,  to  bring 
up  the  forces  of  unimpeachable  ecclesiastical 
authority  in  support  of  my  position.  In  a  sermon 
preached  last  December,  in  St.  Paul's  Cathedral,^ 
Canon  Liddon  declares  : — 

For  Christians  it  will  be  enough  to  know  that  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  set  the  seal  of  His  infallible  sanction  on  the  whole  of  the  Old 
Testament.  He  found  the  Hebrew  Canon  as  we  have  it  in  our 
hands  to-day,  and  He  treated  it  as  an  authority  Avhich  was 
above  discussion.  Kay  more  :  He  went  out  of  His  way — if  we 
may  reverently  speak  thus — to  sanction  not  a  few  portions  of  it 
ivhich  modern  scepticism  rejects.  When  He  would  warn  His 
hearers  against  the  dangers  of  spiritual  relapse,  He  bids  them 
remember  "Lot's  wife.""  "When  He  would  point  out  how 
worldly  engagements  may  blind  the  soul  to  a  coming  judgment, 
He  reminds  them  how  men  ate,  and  drank,  and  married,  and 
were  given  iu  marriage,  until  the  day  that  Noah  entered  into 

1  The  IVorfh  of  the  Old  Testament,  a  Sermon  preached  in  St. 
Paul's  Cathedral  on  the  Second  Sunday  in  Advent,  8th  Dec  , 
1SS9,  by  H.  P.  Liddon,  D.D.,  D.C.L.,  Canon  and  Chancello/- 
of  St.  Paul's.  Second  edition,  revised  and  with  a  new  prefara, 
1890. 

•^  St.  Luke  xvii.  32. 


VI      LIGHTS  OF  THE  CHURCH  AND  SCIENCE      209 

the  ark,  and  the  Flood  came  and  destroyed  them  all.^  If  Ho 
would  put  His  finger  on  a  fact  in  past  Jewish  history  which,  by 
its  admitted  reality,  would  warrant  belief  in  His  own  coming 
Kcsurrection,  He  points  to  Jonah's  being  three  days  and  three 
nights  in  the  whale's  belly  (p.  23).2 

The  preacher  proceeds  to  brush  aside  the 
common — I  had  almost  said  vulgar — apologetic 
pretext  that  Jesus  was  using  ad  hominem 
arguments,  or  "accommodating"  his  better 
knowledge  to  popular  ignorance,  as  well  as  to 
point  out  the  inadmissibility  of  the  other 
alternative,  that  he  shared  the  popular  ignorance. 
And  to  those  who  hold  the  latter  view  sarcasm  is 
dealt  out  with  no  niggard  hand. 

But  they  will  find  it  difficult  to  persuade  mankind  that,  if  He 
could  be  mistaken  on  a  matter  of  such  strictly  religious  import- 
ance as  the  value  of  the  sacred  literature  of  His  countrymen, 
He  can  be  safely  trusted  about  anything  else.  The  trust- 
worthiness of  the  Old  Testament  is,  in  fact,  inseparable  from 
the  trustworthiness  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  and  if  we  believe 
that  He  is  the  true  Light  of  the  world,  we  shall  close  our  ears 
against  suggestions  impairing  the  credit  of  those  Jewish  Scrip- 
tures which  have  received  the  stamp  of  His  Divine  authority 
(p.  25). 

Moreover,  I  learn  from  the  public  journals  that 
a  brilliant  and  sharply-cut  view  of  orthodoxy,  of 
like  hue  and  pattern,  was  only  the  other  day 
exhibited  in  that  great  theological  kaleidoscope, 
the  pulpit  of  St.  Mary's,  recalling  the  time  so 
long  passed  by,  when  a  Bampton  lecturer,  in  the 

'  St.  Luke  xvii.  27.  '  St.  Matt.  xii.  40. 

103 


210    LIGHTS   OF  THE   CHURCH  AND   SCIENCE        vi 

same  place,  performed  the  unusual  feat  of  leaving 
the  faith  of  old-fashioned  Christians  undisturbed. 

Yet  many  things  have  happened  in  the  inter- 
vening thirty-one  years.  The  Bampton  lecturer 
of  1859  had  to  grapple  only  with  the  infant 
Hercules  of  historical  criticism ;  and  he  is  now  a 
full-grown  athlete,  bearing  on  his  shoulders  the 
spoils  of  all  the  lions  that  have  stood  in  his  path. 
Surely  a  martyr's  courage,  as  well  as  a  martyr's 
faith,  is  needed  by  any  one  who,  at  this  time,  is 
prepared  to  stand  by  the  following  plea  for  the 
veracity  of  the  Pentateuch  : — 

Adam,  according  to  the  Hebrew  original,  was  for  243  years 
contemporary  with  Methuselah,  who  conversed  for  a  hundred 
years  with  Shem.  Shem  was  for  fifty  years  contemporary  with 
Jacob,  who  probably  saw  Jochebed,  Moses's  mother.  Thus, 
Moses  might  by  oral  tradition  have  obtained  the  history  of 
Abraham,  and  even  of  the  Deluge,  at  third  hand  ;  and  that  of 
the  Temptation  and  the  Fall  at  lilth  hand.     .     .     . 

If  it  be  granted — as  it  seems  to  be — that  the  great  and  stirring 
events  in  a  nation's  life  will,  under  ordinary  circumstances,  be 
remembered  (apart  from  all  written  memorials)  for  the  space 
of  150  years,  being  handed,  down  through  five  generations,  it 
must  be  allowed,  (even  on  mere  human  grounds)  that  the 
account  which  Moses  gives  of  the  Temptation  and  the  Fall  is  to 
be  depended  upon,  if  it  passed  through  no  more  than  four  hands 
between  him  and  Adam.  ^ 

If  "  the  trustworthiness  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ "  is  to  stand  or  fall  with  the  belief  in  the 
sudden  transmutation  of  the  chemical  components 
of  a  woman's  body  into  sodium  chloride,  or  on  the 

1  Hampton  Lectures^  1859,  pp.  50-51. 


VI       LIGHTS    OF   THE   CHURCH   AND   SCIENCE     211 

"  admitted  reality  "  of  Jonah's  ejection,  safe  and 
sound,  on  the  shores  of  the  Levant,  after  three 
days'  sea-journey  in  the  stomach  of  a  gigantic 
marine  animal,  what  possible  pretext  can  there  be 
for  even  hinting  a  doubt  as  to  the  precise  truth  of 
the  longevity  attributed  to  the  Patriarchs  ?  Who 
that  has  swallowed  the  camel  of  Jonah's  journey 
will  be  guilty  of  the  affectation  of  straining  at 
such  a  historical  gnat — nay,  midge — as  the  sup- 
position that  the  mother  of  Moses  was  told  the 
story  of  the  Flood  by  Jacob ;  who  had  it  straight 
from  Shem ;  who  was  on  friendly  terms  with 
Methuselah  ;  who  knew  Adam  quite  well  ? 

Yet,  by  the  strange  irony  of  things,  the 
illustrious  brother  of  the  divine  who  propounded 
this  remarkable  theory,  has  been  the  guide  and 
foremost  worker  of  that  band  of  investigators  of 
the  records  of  Assyria  and  of  Babylonia,  who  have 
opened  to  our  view,  not  merely  a  new  chapter, 
but  a  new  volume  of  primeval  history,  relating  to 
the  very  people  who  have  the  most  numerous 
points  of  contact  with  the  life  of  the  ancient 
Hebrews.  Now,  whatever  imperfections  may  yet 
obscure  the  full  value  of  the  Mesopotamian 
records,  everything  that  has  been  clearly  ascer- 
tained tends  to  the  conclusion  that  the  assignment 
of  no  more  than  4000  years  to  the  period  between 
the  time  of  the  origin  of  mankind  a.nd  that  of 
Augustus  Caesar,  is  wholly  inadmissible.  There- 
fore    the     Biblical     chronology,     which    Canon 


212     LIGHTS   OF    THE   CHURCH  AND  SCIENCE       vi 

Kawlinson  trusted  so  implicitly  in  1859,  is 
relegated  by  all  serious  critics  to  the  domain  of 
fable. 

But  if  scientific  method,  operating  in  the  re- 
gion of  history,  of  philology,  of  archaeology,  in 
the  course  of  the  last  thirty  or  forty  years,  has 
become  thus  formidable  to  the  theological  dog- 
matist, what  may  not  be  said  about  scientific 
method  working  in  the  province  of  physical 
science  ?  For,  if  it  be  true  that  the  Canonical 
Scriptures  have  innumerable  points  of  contact  with 
civil  history,  it  is  no  less  true  that  they  have  almost 
as  many  with  natural  history ;  and  their  accuracy 
is  put  to  the  test  as  severely  by  the  latter  as  by 
the  former.  The  origin  of  the  present  state  of 
the  heavens  and  the  earth  is  a  problem  which 
lies  strictly  within  the  province  of  physical 
science  ;  so  is  that  of  the  origin  of  man  among 
living  things ;  so  is  that  of  the  physical  changes 
which  the  earth  has  undergone  since  the  origin  of 
man  ;  so  is  that  of  the  origin  of  the  various  races 
and  nations  of  men,  with  all  their  varieties  of 
language  and  physical  conformation.  Whether 
the  earth  moves  round  the  sun  or  the  contrary ; 
whether  the  bodily  and  mental  diseases  of  men 
and  animals  are  caused  by  evil  spirits  or  not ; 
whether  there  is  such  au  agency  as  witchcraft  or 
not — all  these  are  purely  scientific  questions ; 
and  to  all  of  them  the  Canonical  Scriptures 
profess    to     give     true    answers.     And    though 


VI       LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHURCH   AND   SCIENCE      213 

nothing  is  more  common  than  the  assumption 
that  these  books  come  into  conflict  only  with  the 
speculative  part  of  modern  physical  science,  no 
assumption  can  have  less  foundation. 

The  antagonism  between  natural  knowledge 
and  the  Pentateuch  would  be  as  great  if  the 
speculations  of  our  time  had  never  been  heard  of. 
It  arises  out  of  contradiction  upon  matters  of 
fact.  The  books  of  ecclesiastical  authority  de- 
clare that  certain  events  happened  in  a  certain 
fashion  ;  the  books  of  scientific  authority  say  they 
did  not.  As  it  seems  that  this  unquestionable 
truth  has  not  yet  penetrated  among  many  of 
those  who  speak  and  write  on  these  subjects,  it 
may  be  useful  to  give  a  full  illustration  of  it. 
And  for  that  purpose  I  propose  to  deal,  at  some 
length,  with  the  narrative  of  the  Noachian  Deluge 
given  in  Genesis. 

The  Bampton  lecturer  in  1859,  and  the  Canon 
of  St.  Paul's  in  1890,  are  in  full  agreement  that 
this  history  is  true,  in  the  sense  in  which  I  have 
defined  historical  truth.  The  former  is  of  opinion 
that  the  account  attributed  to  Berosus  records  a 
tradition — 

not  drawn  from  the  Hebrew  record,  much  less  the  foundation  of 
that  record ;  yet  coinciding  with  it  in  the  most  remarkable 
way.  The  Babylonian  version  is  tricked  out  with  a  few  ex- 
travagances, as  the  monstrous  size  of  the  vessel  and  the 
translation  of  Xisuthros  ;  but  otherwise  it  is  the  Hebrew  history 
duwn  to  its  minutice  (p.  64). 


214    LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHURCH   AND   SCIENCE        VI 

Moreover,  correcting  Niebuhr,  the  Bampton 
lecturer  points  out  that  the  narrative  of  Berosus 
implies  the  universality  of  the  Flood. 

It  is  plain  that  the  waters  are  represented  as  prevailing  above 
the  tops  of  the  loftiest  mountains  in  Armenia — a  height  -which, 
must  have  been  seen  to  involve  the  submersion  of  all  the  countries 
with  which  the  Babylonians  were  acquainted  (p.  66). 

I  may  remark,  in  passing,  that  many  people  think 
the  size  of  Noah's  ark  "  monstrous,"  considering  the 
probable  state  of  the  art  of  shipbuilding  only 
1600  years  after  the  origin  of  man  ;  while  others 
are  so  unreasonable  as  to  inquire  why  the 
translation  of  Enoch  is  less  an  "  extravagance " 
than  that  of  Xisuthros.  It  is  more  important, 
however,  to  note  that  the  universality  of  the 
Deluge  is  recognised,  not  merely  as  a  part  of 
the  story,  but  as  a  necessary  consequence  of  some 
of  its  details.  The  latest  exponent  of  Anglican 
orthodoxy,  as  we  have  seen,  insists  upon  the 
accuracy  of  the  Pentateuchal  history  of  the  Flood 
in  a  still  more  forcible  manner.  It  is  cited  as 
one  of  those  very  narratives  to  which  the  authority 
of  the  Founder  of  Christianity  is  pledged,  and 
upon  the  accuracy  of  which  "  the  trustworthiness 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  "  is  staked,  just  as  others 
have  staked  it  upon  the  truth  of  the  histories  of 
demoniac  possession  in  the  Gospels. 

Now,  when  those  who  put  their  trust  in 
scientific  methods  of  ascertaining  the  truth  in 
the  province   of  natural   history  find  themselves 


VI         LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHUKCH   AND   SCIENCE   215 

confronted  and  opposed,  on  their  own  ground, 
by  ecclesiastical  pretensions  to  better  knowledge, 
it  is,  undoubtedly,  most  desirable  for  them  to 
make  sure  that  their  conclusions,  whatever  they 
may  be,  are  well  founded.  And,  if  they  put  aside 
the  unauthorised  interference  with  their  business 
and  relegate  the  Pentateuchal  history  to  the 
region  of  pure  fiction,  they  are  bound  to  assure 
themselves  that  they  do  so  because  the  plainest 
teachings  of  Nature  (apart  from  all  doubtful 
speculations)  are  irreconcilable  with  the  assertions 
which  they  reject. 

At  the  present  time,  it  is  difficult  to  persuade 
serious  scientific  inquirers  to  occupy  themselves, 
in  any  way,  with  the  Noachian  Deluge.  They 
look  at  you  with  a  smile  and  a  shrug,  and  say 
they  have  more  important  matters  to  attend  to 
than  mere  antiquarianism.  But  it  was  not  so  in 
my  youth.  At  that  time,  geologists  and  biologists 
could  hardly  follow  to  the  end  any  path  of  inquiry 
without  finding  the  w^ay  blocked  by  Noah  and  his 
ark,  or  by  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis ;  and  it 
was  a  serious  matter,  in  this  country  at  any  rate, 
for  a  man  to  be  suspected  of  doubting  the  literal 
truth  of  the  Diluvial  or  any  other  Pentateuchal 
history.  The  fiftieth  anniversary  of  the  founda- 
tion of  the  Geological  Club  (in  1824)  was,  if  I 
remember  rightly,  the  last  occasion  on  which  the 
late  Sir  Charles  Lyell  spoke  to  even  so  small  a 
public  as  the  members  of  that  body.     Our  veteran 


216    LIGHTS   OF  THE   CHURCH   AND   SCIENCE        vi 

leader  lighted  up  once  more  ;  and,  referring  to 
the  difficulties  which  beset  his  early  efforts  to 
create  a  rational  science  of  geology,  spoke,  with 
his  wonted  clearness  and  vigour,  of  the  social 
ostracism  which  pursued  him  after  the  publication 
of  the  "  Principles  of  Geology,"  in  1880,  on  account 
of  the  obvious  tendency  of  that  noble  work  to 
discredit  the  Pentateuchal  accounts  of  the  Creation 
and  the  Deluge.  If  my  younger  contemporaries 
find  this  hard  to  believe,  I  may  refer  them  to  a 
grave  book, "  On  the  Doctrine  of  the  Deluge,"  pub- 
lished eight  years  later,  and  dedicated  by  its 
author  to  his  father,  the  then  Archbishop  of 
York.  The  first  chapter  refers  to  the  treatment 
of  the  ''  Mosaic  Deluge,"  by  Dr.  Buckland  and 
Mr.  Lyell,  in  the  following  terms : 

Their  respect  for  revealed  religion  has  prevented  them  from 
arraying  themselves  openly  against  the  Scriptural  account  of  it 
— much  less  do  they  deny  its  truth — but  they  are  in  a  great 
huriy  to  escape  from  the  consideration  of  it,  and  evidently 
concur  in  the  opinion  of  Linnseus,  that  no  proofs  whatever  of 
the  Deluge  are  to  be  discovered  in  the  structure  of  the  earth 
(p.  1). 

And  after  an  attempt  to  reply  to  some  of  Lyell's 
arguments,  which  it  would  be  cruel  to  reproduce, 
the  writer  continues  : — 

When,  therefore,  upon  such  slender  grounds,  it  is  determined, 
in  answer  to  those  who  insist  upon  its  universality,  that  the 
Mosaic  Deluge  must  be  considered  a  preternatural  event,  far 
beyond  the  reach  of  philosophical  inquiry  ;  not  only  as  to  the 
causes  employed  to  produce  it,  but  as  to  the  effects  most  likely 


VI         LIGHTS  OF  THE   CHURCH  AND   SCIENCE   217 

to  result  from  it ;  that  determination  wears  an  aspect  of  scepti- 
cism, which,  however  much  soever  it  may  be  unintentional  in 
the  mind  of  the  writer,  yet  cannot  but  produce  an  evil  im- 
pression on  those  who  are  already  predisposed  to  carp  and  cavii 
at  the  evidences  of  Revelation  (pp.  8-9). 

The  kindly  and  courteous  writer  of  these  curious 
passages  is  evidently  unwilling  to  make  the  geo- 
logists the  victims  of  general  opprobrium  by 
pressing  the  obvious  consequences  of  their  teach- 
ing home.  One  is  therefore  pained  to  think  of 
the  feelings  with  which,  if  he  lived  so  long  as  to 
become  acquainted  with  the  "Dictionary  of  the 
Bible,"  he  must  have  perused  the  article  "  Noah,'* 
written  by  a  dignitary  of  the  Church  for  that 
standard  compendium  and  published  in  1863. 
For  the  doctrine  of  the  universality  of  the  Del- 
uge is  therein  altogether  given  up  ;  and  I  permit 
myself  to  hope  that  a  long  criticism  of  the  story 
from  the  point  of  view  of  natural  science,  with 
which,  at  the  request  of  the  learned  theologian 
who  wrote  it,  I  supplied  him,  may,  in  some  degree, 
have  contributed  towards  this  happy  result. 

Notwithstanding  diligent  search,  I  have  been 
■unable  to  discover  that  the  universality  of  the 
Deluge  has  any  defender  left,  at  least  among  those 
who  have  so  far  mastered  the  rudiments  of 
natural  knowledge  as  to  be  able  to  appreciate  the 
weight  of  evidence  against  it.  For  example,  when 
I  turned  to  the  "  Speaker's  Bible,"  published 
under  the  sanction  of  high  Anglican  authority,  I 


21 S    LIGHTS  OF   THE  CHURCH   AND   SCIENCE        vi 

found  the  following  judicial  and  judicious  deliver- 
ance, the  skilful  wording  of  which  may  adorn, 
but  does  not  hide,  the  completeness  of  the  sur- 
render of  the  old  teaching  : — 

Without  pronouncing  too  hastily  on  any  fair  inferences  from 
the  words  of  Scripture,  we  may  reasonably  say  that  their  most 
natural  interpretation  is,  that  the  whole  race  of  man  had  be- 
come grievously  corrupted  since  the  faithful  had  intermingled 
with  the  ungodly ;  that  the  inhabited  world  was  consequently 
filled  with  violence,  and  that  God  had  decreed  to  destroy  all 
mankind  except  one  single  family  ;  that,  therefore,  all  that 
portion  of  the  earth,  perhaps  as  yet  a  very  small  portion,  into 
which  mankind  had  spread  \vas  overwhelmed  with  water.  The 
ark  was  ordained  to  save  one  faithful  family  ;  and  lest  that 
family,  on  the  subsidence  of  the  waters,  should  find  the  whole 
country  round  them  a  desert,  a  pair  of  all  the  beasts  of  the  land 
and  of  the  fowls  of  the  air  were  preserved  along  with  them,  and 
along  with  them  went  forth  to  replenish  the  now  desolated 
continent.  The  words  of  Scripture  (confirmed  as  they  are  by 
universal  tradition)  appear  at  least  to  mean  as  much  as  this. 
They  do  not  necessarily  mean  more.^ 

In  the  third  edition  of  Kitto's  "  Cyclopaedia  of 
Biblical  Literature  "  (1876),  the  article  "  Deluge," 
written  by  my  friend,  the  present  distinguished 
head  of  the  Geological  Survey  of  Great  Britain,  ex- 
tinguishes the  universality  doctrine  as  thoroughly 
as  might  be  expected  from  its  authorship ;  and, 
since  the  writer  of  the  article  "  Noah  "  refers  his 
readers  to  that  entitled  "Deluge,"  it  is  to  be 
supposed,  notwithstanding  his  generally  orthodox 
tone,  that  he  does  nob  dissent  from  its  conclusions. 
Again,  the  writers  in  Herzog  s  "Real-Encyclopadie" 
^  Commentary  on  Genesis,  by  the  Bishop  of  Ely,  p.  77. 


VI       LIGHTS   OF  THE   CHURCH  AND  SCIENCE     219 

(Bd.  X.  1882)  and  in  Riehm's  "  Handworterbucli " 
(1884) — both  works  with  a  conservative  leaning — 
are  on  the  same  side ;  and  Diestel,^  in  his  full 
discussion  of  the  subject,  remorselessly  rejects  the 
universality  doctrine.     Even  that  staunch  oppon- 
ent of  scientific  rationalism — may  I  say  rationality? 
— Zockler,^  flinches  from  a  distinct  defence  of  the 
thesis,  any  opposition  to  which,  well  within  my 
recollection,  Avas  howled  down  by  the  orthodox  as 
mere  "  infidelity."     All  that,  in  his  sore  straits, 
Dr.  Ziickler  is  able  to  do,  is  to  pronounce  a  faint 
commendation  upon  a  particularly  absurd  attempt 
at    reconciliation,   which    would   make    out    the 
Noachian  Deluge  to  be  a  catastrophe  which  oc- 
curred  at  the  end  of  the    Glacial  Epoch.     This 
hypothesis  involves  only  the  trifle  of  a  physical 
revolution  of  which  geology  knows  nothing ;  and 
which,  if  it  secured  the  accuracy  of  the  Penta- 
teuchal  writer  about  the  fact  of  the  Deluge,  would 
leave  the  details  of  his  account  as  irreconcilable 
with  the  truths  of  elementary  physical  science  as 
ever.     Thus  I  may  be  permitted  to  spare  myself 
and  my  readers  the  weariness  of  a  recapitulation 
of    the    overwhelming    arguments     against     the 
universality  of  the  Deluge,  which  they  will  now 
find  for  themselves  stated,  as  fully  and  forcibly  as 
could   be   wished,   by  Anglican  and  other  theo- 
logians, whose  orthodoxy  and  conservative  tend- 

1  Die  Sintflut,  1876, 

'  Theoloyie  uiuL  Naturwissenschaft,  ii.  784-791  (1877> 


220     LIGHTS   OF  THE   CHURCH   AND   SCIENCE       vi 

enciGS  have,  hitherto,  been  above  suspicion.  Yet 
many  fully  admit  (and,  indeed,  nothing  can  be 
plainer)  that  the  Pentateuchal  narrator  means  to 
convey  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  whole  earth 
known  to  him  was  inundated  ;  nor  is  it  less 
obvious  that  unless  all  mankind,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  Noah  and  his  family,  were  actually  de- 
stroyed, the  references  to  the  Flood  in  the  New 
Testament  are  unintelligible. 

But  I  am  quite  aware  that  the  strength  of  the 
demonstration  that  no  universal  Deluge  ever  took 
place  has  produced  a  change  of  front  in  the  army 
of  apologetic  writers.  They  have  imagined  that 
the  substitution  of  the  adjective  "partial"  for 
''universal,"  will  save  the  credit  of  the  Pentateuch, 
and  permit  them,  after  all,  without  too  many 
blushes,  to  declare  that  the  progress  of  modern 
science  only  strengthens  the  authority  of  Moses. 
Nowhere  have  I  found  the  case  of  the  advocates 
of  this  method  of  escaping  from  the  difficulties  of 
the  actual  position  better  put  than  in  the  lecture 
of  Professor  Diestel  to  which  I  have  referred. 
After  frankly  admitting  that  the  old  doctrine  of 
universality  involves  physical  impossibilities,  he 
continues : — 

All  these  difficulties  fall  away  as  soon  as  we  give  up  the 
universality  of  the  Deluge,  and  imagine  a  partial  flooding  of  the 
earth,  say  in  western  Asia.  But  have  we  a  right  to  do  so  ? 
The  naiTative  speaks  of  "the  whole  earth."  But  what  is  the 
meaning  of  this  expression  ?     Surely  not  the  W'hole  surface  of 


YI       LIGHTS   OF  THE    CHUECH   AND  SCIENCE     221 

the  earth  according  to  the  ideas  of  modern  geographers,  but,  at 
most,  according  to  the  conceptions  of  the  Biblical  author.  This 
very  simple  conclusion,  however,  is  never  drawn  by  too  many 
readers  of  the  Bible.  But  one  need  only  cast  one's  eyes  over 
the  tenth  chapter  of  Genesis  in  order  to  become  acquainted  with 
the  geographical  horizon  of  the  Jews.  In  the  north  it  was 
bounded  by  the  Black  Sea  and  the  mountains  of  Armenia  ; 
extended  towards  the  east  very  little  beyond  the  Tigris  ;  hardly 
reached  the  apex  of  the  Persian  Gulf  ;  passed,  then,  through  the 
middle  of  Arabia  and  the  Red  Sea ;  went  southward  through 
Abyssinia,  and  then  turned  westward  by  the  frontiers  of  Egypt, 
and  inclosed  the  easternmost  islands  of  the  Mediterranean  (p  11). 

The  justice  of  this  observation  must  be  ad- 
mitted, no  less  than  the  further  remark  that,  in 
still  earlier  times,  the  pastoral  Hebrews  very 
probably  had  yet  more  restricted  notions  of  what 
constituted  the  "whole  earth."  Moreover,  I,  for 
one,  fully  agree  with  Professor  Diestel  that  the 
motive,  or  generative  incident,  of  the  whole  story 
is  to  be  sought  in  the  occasionally  excessive  and 
desolating  floods  of  the  Euphrates  and  the  Tigris. 

Let  us,  provisionally,  accept  the  theory  of  a 
partial  deluge,  and  try  to  form  a  clear  mental 
picture  of  the  occurrence.  Let  us  suppose  that, 
for  forty  days  and  forty  nights,  such  a  vast 
quantity  of  water  was  poured  upon  the  ground 
that  the  whole  surface  of  Mesopotamia  was  covered 
by  water  to  a  depth  certainly  greater,  probably 
much  greater,  than  fifteen  cubits,  or  twenty  feet 
(Gen.  vii.  20).  The  inundation  prevails  upon  the 
earth  for  one  hundred  and  fifty  days  ;  and  theo 
the  flood  gradually  decreases,  until,  on  the  seven- 


222     LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHURCH  AND   SCIENCE       vi 

teenth  day  of  the  seventli  month,  the  ark,  which 
had  previously  floated  on  its  surface,  grounds  upon 
the  "  mountains  of  Ararat "  ^  (Gen.  viii.  34). 
Then,  as  Diestel  has  acutely  pointed  out 
("  Sintflut,"  p.  13),  we  are  to  imagine  the  further 
suhsidence  of  the  flood  to  take  place  so  gradually 
that  it  was  not  until  nearly  two  months  and  a-half 
after  this  time  (that  is  to  say,  on  the  first  day  of 
the  tenth  month)  that  the  "tops  of  the  moun- 
tains "  became  visible.  Hence  it  follows  that,  if 
the  ark  drew  even  as  much  as  twenty  feet  of 
water,  the  level  of  the  inundation  fell  very  slowly 
— at  a  rate  of  only  a  few  inches  a  day — until  the 
top  of  the  mountain  on  which  it  rested  became 
visible.  This  is  an  amount  of  movement  which, 
if  it  took  place  in  the  sea,  would  be  overlooked 
by  ordinary  people  on  the  shore.  But  the 
Mesopotamian  plain  slopes  gently,  from  an  eleva- 
tion of  500  or  600  feet  at  its  northern  end,  to  the 
sea,  at  its  southern  end,  with  hardly  so  much  as 
a  notable  ridge  to  break  its  uniform  flatness,  for 
300  to  400  miles.  These  being  the  conditions  of 
the  case,  the  following  inquiry  naturally  presents 
itself :  not,  be  it  observed,  as  a  recondite  problem, 
generated  by  modem  speculation,  but  as  a  plain 
suggestion  flowing  out  of  that  very  ordinary  and 
archaic  piece  of  knowledge  that  water  cannot  be 

1  It  is  very  doubtful  if  this  means  the  ref,aon  of  the  Armenian 
Arai-at.  More  probably  it  designates  some  part  either  of  the 
Kurdish  range  or  of  its  south-eastern  continuation. 


VI       LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHURCH  AND   SCIENCE     223 

piled  up  m  a  heap,  like  sand ;  or  that  it  seeks  the 
lowest  level.  When,  after  150  days,  "  the  foun- 
tains also  of  the  deep  and  the  windows  of  heaven 
were  stopped,  and  the  rain  from  heaven  was 
restrained "  (Gen.  viii.  2),  what  prevented  the 
mass  of  water,  several,  possibly  very  many, 
fathoms  deep,  which  covered,  say,  the  present 
site  of  Bagdad,  from  sweeping  seaward  in  a  furious 
torrent ;  and,  in  a  very  few  hours,  leaving,  not 
only  the  "  tops  of  the  mountains,"  but  the  whole 
plain,  save  any  minor  depressions,  bare  ?  How 
could  its  subsidence,  by  any  possibility,  be  an 
affair  of  weeks  and  months  ? 

And  if  this  difficulty  is  not  enough,  let  any  one 
try  to  imagine  how  a  mass  of  water  several,  per- 
haps very  many,  fathoms  deep,  could  be  accumu- 
lated on  a  flat  surface  of  land  rising  well  above 
the  sea,  and  separated  from  it  by  no  sort  of 
barrier.  Most  people  know  Lord's  Cricket- 
ground.  Would  it  not  be  an  absurd  contradiction 
to  our  common  knowledge  of  the  properties  of 
w^ater  to  imagine  that,  if  all  the  mains  of  all  the 
waterworks  of  London  were  turned  on  to  it,  they 
could  maintain  a  heap  of  water  twenty  feet  deep 
over  its  level  surface  ?  Is  it  not  obvious  that  the 
water,  whatever  momentary  accumulation  might 
take  23lace  at  first,  would  not  stop  there,  but  that 
it  would  dash,  like  a  mighty  mill-race,  southwards 
down  the  gentle  slope  which  ends  in  the  Thames  ? 
And   is   it   not   further    obvious,   that    whatever 


224      LIGHTS  OF  THE  CHURCH  AND  SCIENCE       vi 

depth  of  water  might  be  maintained  over  the 
cricket-ground  so  long  as  all  the  mains  poured  on 
to  it,  anything  which  floated  there  would  be 
speedily  whirled  away  by  the  current,  like  a  cork 
in  a  gutter  when  the  rain  pours  ?  But  if  this  is 
so,  then  it  is  no  less  certain  that  Noah's  deeply 
laden,  sailless,  earless,  and  rudderless  craft,  if  by 
good  fortune  it  escaped  capsizing  in  whirlpools,  or 
having  its  bottom  knocked  into  holes  by  snags 
(like  those  which  prove  fatal  even  to  well-built 
steamers  on  the  Mississippi  in  our  day),  would 
have  speedily  found  itself  a  good  way  down  the 
Persian  Gulf,  and  not  long  after  in  the  Indian 
Ocean,  somewhere  between  Arabia  and  Hindostan. 
Even  if,  eventually,  the  ark  might  have  gone 
ashore,  with  other  jetsam  and  flotsam,  on  the 
coasts  of  Arabia,  or  of  Hindostan,  or  of  the  Maldives, 
or  of  Madagascar,  its  return  to  the  "  mountains  of 
Ararat "  would  have  been  a  miracle  more  stupen- 
dous than  all  the  rest. 

Thus,  the  last  state  of  the  would-be  reconcilers 
of  the  story  of  the  Deluge  with  fact  is  worse  than 
the  first.  All  that  they  have  done  is  to  transfer 
the  contradictions  to  established  truth  from  the 
region  of  science  proper  to  that  of  common  in- 
formation and  common  sense.  For,  really,  the 
assertion  that  the  surface  of  a  body  of  deep  water, 
to  which  no  addition  was  made,  and  which  there 
was  nothing  to  stop  from  running  into  the  sea, 
Bank  at  the  rate  of  only  a  few  inches  or  even  feet 


VI       LIGHTS   OF  THE  CHURCH  AND  SCIENCE     225 

a  day,  simply  outrages  the  most  ordinary  and 
familiar  teachings  of  every  man's  daily  experience. 
A  child  may  see  the  folly  of  it. 

In  addition,  I  may  remark  that  the  necessary 
assumption  of  the  "partial  Deluge  "  hypothesis  (if  it 
is  confined  to  Mesopotamia)  that  the  Hebrew  writer 
must  have  meant  low  hills  when  he  said  "  high 
mountains,"  is  quite  untenable.  On  the  eastern 
side  of  the  Mesopotamian  plain,  the  snowy  peaks 
of  the  frontier  ranges  of  Persia  are  visible  from 
Bagdad,^  and  even  the  most  ignorant  herdsmen  in 
the  neifjhbourhood  of  "  Ur  of  the  Chaldees,"  near 
its  western  limit,  could  hardly  have  been  unac- 
quainted with  the  comparatively  elevated  plateau 
of  the  Syrian  desert  which  lay  close  at  hand. 
But,  surely,  we  must  suppose  the  Biblical  writer 
to  be  acquainted  with  the  highlands  of  Palestine 
and  with  the  masses  of  the  Sinaitic  peninsula, 
which  soar  more  than  8000  feet  above  the  sea,  if 
he  knew  of  no  higher  elevations ;  and,  if  so,  he 
could  not  well  have  meant  to  refer  to  mere 
hillocks  when  he  said  that  "  all  the  high  moun- 
tains which  were  under  the  whole  heaven  were 
covered  "  (Genesis  vii.  19).  Even  the  hill-country 
of  Galilee  reaches  an  elevation  of  4000  feet  ;  and 
a  flood  which  covered  it  could  by  no  possibility 
have  been  other  than  universal  in  its  superficial 
extent.     Water  really  cannot  be  got  to  stand  at, 

^  So  Reclus  {Nouvelle  Geographie  Universelle,  ix.  386),  but  I 
find  the  statement  doubted  by  an  authority  of  the  first  rank. 
104 


226     LIGHTS   OF   THE    CHURCH  AND  SCIENCE      vi 

say,  4000  feet  above  the  sea-level  over  Palestine, 
witliout  covering  the  rest  of  the  globe  to  the  same 
height.  Even  if,  in  the  course  of  Noah's  six 
hundredth  year,  some  prodigious  convulsion  had 
sunk  the  whole  region  inclosed  within  "  the 
horizon  of  the  geographical  knowledge "  of  the 
Israelites  by  that  much,  and  another  had  pushed 
it  up  again,  just  in  time  to  catch  the  ark  upon 
the  "  mountains  of  Ararat,"  matters  are  not  much 
mended.  I  am  afraid  to  think  of  what  would 
have  become  of  a  vessel  so  little  seaworthy  as  the 
ark  and  of  its  very  numerous  passengers,  under 
the  peculiar  obstacles  to  quiet  flotation  which  such 
rapid  movements  of  depression  and  upheaval 
would  have  generated. 

Thus,  in  view,  not,  I  repeat,  of  the  recondite 
speculations  of  infidel  philosophers,  but  in  the  face 
of  the  plainest  and  most  commonplace  of  ascer- 
tained physical  facts,  the  story  of  the  Noachian 
Deluge  has  no  more  claim  to  credit  than  has 
that  of  Deucalion ;  and  whether  it  was,  or  was 
not,  suggested  by  the  familiar  acquaintance  of 
its  originators  with  the  effects  of  unusually  great 
overflows  of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates,  it  is 
utterly  devoid  of  historical  truth. 

That  is,  in  my  judgment,  the  necessary  result 
of  the  application  of  criticism,  based  upon  assured 
physical  knowledge,  to  the  story  of  the  Deluge. 
And  it  is  satisfactory  that  the  criticism  which  is 


VI      LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHURCH   AND   SCIENCE       227 

based,  not  upon  literary  and  historical  specula- 
tions, but  upon  well-ascertained  facts  in  the 
departments  of  literature  and  history,  tends  to 
exactly  the  same  conclusion. 

For  I  find  this  much  agreed  upon  by  all 
Biblical  scholars  of  repute,  that  the  story  of  the 
Deluge  in  Genesis  is  separable  into  at  least  two 
sets  of  statements ;  and  that,  when  the  statements 
thus  separated  are  recombined  in  their  proper 
order,  each  set  furnishes  an  account  of  the  event, 
coherent  and  complete  within  itself,  but  in  some 
respects  discordant  with  that  afforded  by  the  other 
set.  This  fact,  as  I  understand,  is  not  disputed. 
Whether  one  of  these  is  the  work  of  an  Elohist, 
and  the  other  of  a  Jehovist  narrator ;  whether 
the  two  have  been  pieced  together  in  this  strange 
fashion  because,  in  the  estimation  of  the  compilers 
and  editors  of  the  Pentateuch,  they  had  equal 
and  independent  authority,  or  not ;  or  whether 
there  is  some  other  way  of  accounting  for  it — are 
questions  the  answers  to  which  do  not  affect  the 
fact.  If  possible  I  avoid  a  priori  arguments. 
But  still,  I  think  it  may  be  urged,  without  impru- 
dence, that  a  narrative  having  this  structure  is 
hardly  such  as  might  be  expected  from  a  writer 
possessed  of  full  and  infallibly  accurate  knowledge. 
Once  more,  it  would  seem  that  it  is  not  necessarily 
the  mere  inclination  of  the  sceptical  spirit  to 
question  everything,  or  the  wilful  blindness  of 
infidels,  which  prompts  grave  doubts  as  to  tlie 


228    LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHURCH   AND  SCIENCE        vi 

value   of  a   narrative  thus  curiously  unlike  the 
ordinary  run  of  veracious  histories. 

But  the  voice  of  archaeological  and  historical 
criticism  still  has  to  be  heard  ;  and  it  gives  forth 
no  uncertain  sound.  The  marvellous  recovery 
of  the  records  of  an  antiquity,  far  superior  to  any 
that  can  be  ascribed  to  the  Pentateuch,  which 
has  been  effected  by  the  decipherers  of  cuneiform 
characters,  has  put  us  in  possession  of  a  series, 
once  more,  not  of  speculations,  but  of  facts,  which 
have  a  most  remarkable  bearing  upon  the  question 
of  the  trustworthiness  of  the  narrative  of  the 
Flood.  It  is  established,  that  for  centuries  before 
the  asserted  migration  of  Terah  from  Ur  of  the 
Chaldees  (which,  according  to  the  orthodox  inter- 
preters of  the  Pentateuch,  took  place  after  the 
year  2000  B.C.)  Lower  Mesopotamia  was  the  seat 
of  a  civilisation  in  which  art  and  science  and 
literature  had  attained  a  development  formerly 
unsuspected,  or,  if  there  were  faint  reports  of  it, 
treated  as  fabulous.  And  it  is  also  no  matter  of 
speculation,  but  a  fact,  that  the  libraries  of  these 
people  contain  versions  of  a  long  epic  poem,  one 
of  the  twelve  books  of  which  tells  a  story  of  a 
deluge,  which,  in  a  number  of  its  leading  features, 
corresponds  with  the  story  attributed  to  Berosus, 
no  less  than  with  the  story  given  in  Genesis,  with 
curious  exactness.  Thus,  the  correctness  of  Canon 
Rawlinson's  conclusion,  cited  above,  that  the  story 
of  Berosus  was  neither  drawn  from  the  Hebrew 


VI       LIGHTS   OF  THE  CHURCH   AND  SCIENCE      229 

record,  nor  is  the  foundation  of  it,  can  hardly  be 
questioned.  It  is  higldy  probable,  if  not  certain, 
that  Berosus  relied  upon  one  of  the  versions  (for 
there  seem  to  have  been  several)  of  the  old  Baby- 
Ionian  epos,  extant  in  his  time  ;  and,  if  that  is 
a  reasonable  conclusion,  why  is  it  unreasonable  to 
believe  that  the  two  stories,  which  the  Hebrew 
compiler  has  put  together  in  such  an  inartistic 
fashion,  were  ultimately  derived  from  the  same 
source  ?  I  say  ultimately,  because  it  does  not  at 
all  follow  that  the  two  versions,  possibly  trimmed 
by  the  Jehovistic  writer  on  the  one  hand,  and  by 
the  Elohistic  on  the  other,  to  suit  Hebrew  require- 
ments, may  not  have  been  current  among  the 
Israelites  for  ages.  And  they  may  have  acquired 
great  authority  before  they  were  combined  in  the 
Pentateuch. 

Looking  at  the  convergence  of  all  these  lines  of 
evidsnce  to  the  one  conclusion — that  the  story  of 
the  Flood  in  Genesis  is  merely  a  Bowdlerised 
version  of  one  of  the  oldest  pieces  of  purely 
fictitious  literature  extant ;  that  whether  this  is, 
or  is  not,  its  origin,  the  events  asserted  in  it  to 
have  taken  place  assuredly  never  did  take  place  ; 
further,  that,  in  point  of  fact,  the  story,  in  the 
plain  and  logically  necessary  sense  of  its  words, 
has  long  since  been  given  up  by  orthodox  and 
conservative  commentators  of  the  Established 
Church — I  can  but  admire  the  courage  and  clear 
foresight  of  the  Anglican  divine  who  tells  us  that 


230    LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHURCH   AND   SCIENCE        vi 

we  must  be  prepared  to  choose  between  the 
trustworthiness  of  scientific  method  and  the 
trustworthiness  of  that  which  the  Church  declares 
to  be  Divine  authority.  For,  to  my  mind,  this 
declaration  of  war  to  the  knife  against  secular 
science,  even  in  its  most  elementary  form ;  this 
rejection,  without  a  moment's  hesitation,  of  any 
and  all  evidence  which  conflicts  with  theological 
dogma — is  the  only  position  which  is  logically 
reconcilable  with  the  axioms  of  orthodoxy.  If  the 
Gospels  truly  report  that  which  an  incarnation  of 
the  God  of  Truth  communicated  to  the  world,  then 
it  surely  is  absurd  to  attend  to  any  other  evidence 
touching  matters  about  which  he  made  any  clear 
statement,  or  the  truth  of  which  is  distinctly 
implied  by  his  words.  If  the  exact  historical 
truth  of  the  Gospels  is  an  axiom  of  Christianity, 
it  is  as  just  and  right  for  a  Christian  to  say.  Let 
us  "  close  our  ears  against  suggestions  "  of  scientific 
critics,  as  it  is  for  the  man  of  science  to  refuse  to 
waste  his  time  upon  circle-squarers  and  flat-earth 
fanatics. 

It  is  commonly  reported  that  the  manifesto  by 
which  the  Canon  of  St.  Paul's  proclaims  that  he 
nails  the  colours  of  the  straitest  Biblical  infalli- 
bility to  the  mast  of  the  ship  ecclesiastical,  was 
put  forth  as  a  counterblast  to  "  Lux  Mundi " ; 
and  that  the  passages  which  I  have  more  particu- 
larly quoted  are  directed  against  the  essay  on 
"  The    Holy    Spirit    and    Inspiration "    in   that 


VI      LIGHTS  OF  THE  CHUnCH   AND  SCIENCE      231 

collection  of  treatises  by  Anglican  divines  of  high 
standing,  who  must  assuredly  be  acquitted  of 
conscious  "  infidel "  proclivities.  I  fancy  that 
rumour  must,  for  once,  be  right,  for  it  is  impossible 
to  imagine  a  more  direct  and  diametrical  contra- 
diction than  that  between  the  passages  from  the 
sermon  cited  above  and  those  which  follow : — • 
What  is  questioned  is  that  our  Lord's  words  foreclose  certain 
critical  positions  as  to  the  character  of  Old  Testament  literature. 
For  example,  does  His  use  of  Jonah's  resurrection  as  a  type  of 
His  own,  depend  in  any  real  degree  upon  whether  it  is  historical 
fact  or  allegory  ?  .  .  .  Once  more,  our  Lord  uses  the  time 
before  the  Flood,  to  illustrate  the  carelessness  of  men  before 
His  own  coming.  .  .  .In  referring  to  the  Flood  He  certainly 
suggests  that  He  is  treating  it  as  typical,  for  He  introduces 
circumstances — **  eating  and  drinking,  marrying  and  giving  in 
marriage  " — which  have  no  counterpart  in  the  original  nai-rative 
(pp.  358-9). 

While  insisting  on  the  flow  of  inspiration 
through  the  whole  of  the  Old  Testament,  the 
essayist  does  not  admit  its  universality.  Here, 
also,  the  new  apologetic  demands  a  partial 
flood : 

Rut  does  the  inspiration  of  the  recorder  guarantee  the  exact 
historical  truth  of  what  he  records  ?  And,  in  matter  of  fact, 
can  the  record,  with  due  regard  to  legitimate  historical  criticism, 
be  pronounced  true  ?  Now,  to  the  latter  of  these  two  questions 
(and  they  are  quite  distinct  questions)  we  may  reply  that  there 
is  nothing  to  prevent  our  believing,  as  our  faith  strongly  dis- 
poses us  to  believe,  that  the  record  from  Abraham  downward  is, 
in  substance,  in  the  strict  sense  historical  (p.  351). 

It  would  appear,  therefore,  that  there  is  nothing 
to  prevent  our  believing  that  the  record,  from 


232    LIGHTS   OF  THE   CHURCH    AND   SCIENCE        vi 

Abraham  upward,  consists  of  stories  in  the  strict 
sense  unhistorical,  and  that  the  pre-Abrahamic 
narratives  are  mere  moral  and  religious  "  types  " 
and  parables. 

I  confess  I  soon  lose  my  way  when  I  try 
to  follow  those  who  walk  delicately  among 
"  types "  and  allegories.  A  certain  passion  for 
clearness  forces  me  to  ask,  bluntly,  whether  the 
writer  means  to  say  that  Jesus  did  not  believe 
the  stories  in  question,  or  that  he  did  ?  When 
Jesus  spoke,  as  of  a  matter  of  fact,  that  "the 
Flood  came  and  destroyed  them  all,"  did  he 
believe  that  the  Deluge  really  took  place,  or  not  ? 
It  seems  to  me  that,  as  the  narrative  mentions 
Noah's  wife,  and  his  sons'  wives,  there  is  good 
scriptural  warranty  for  the  statement  that  the 
antediluvians  married  and  were  given  in  marriage  ; 
and  I  should  have  thought  that  their  eating  and 
drinking  might  be  assumed  by  the  firmest 
behever  in  the  literal  truth  of  the  story.  More- 
over, I  venture  to  ask.  what  sort  of  value,  as  an 
illustration  of  God's  methods  of  dealing  with  sin, 
has  an  account  of  an  event  that  never  happened  ? 
If  no  Flood  swept  the  careless  people  away,  how 
is  the  warning  of  more  worth  than  the  cry  of 
"Wolf"  when  there  is  no  wolf?  If  Jonah's 
three  days'  residence  in  the  whale  is  not  an 
"admitted  reality,"  how  could  it  "  warrant  belief" 
in  the  "  coming  resurrection  ? "  If  Lot's  wife 
was  not  turned  into  a  pillar  of  salt,  the  bidding 


VI      LIGHTS   OF  THE   CHURCH   AND  SCIENCE      233 

those  who  turn  back  from  the  narrow  path  to 
"  remember  "  it  is,  morally,  about  on  a  level  with 
telling  a  naughty  child  that  a  bogy  is  coming  to 
fetch  it  away.  Suppose  that  a  Conservative 
orator  warns  his  hearers  to  beware  of  great 
political  and  social  changes,  lest  they  end,  as  in 
France,  in  the  domination  of  a  Robespierre  ;  what 
becomes,  not  only  of  his  argument,  but  of  his 
veracity,  if  he,  personally,  does  not  believe  that 
Itobespierre  existed  and  did  the  deeds  attributed 
to  him  ? 

Like  all  other  attempts  to  reconcile  the  results 
of  scientifically-conducted  investigation  with  the 
demands  of  the  outworn  creeds  of  ecclesiasticism, 
the  essay  on  Inspiration  is  just  such  a  failure  as 
must  await  mediation,  when  the  mediator  is 
unable  properly  to  appreciate  the  weight  of  the 
evidence  for  the  case  of  one  of  the  two  parties. 
The  question  of  "  Inspiration  "  really  possesses  no 
interest  for  those  who  have  cast  ecclesiasticism 
and  all  its  works  aside,  and  have  no  faith  in  any 
source  of  truth  save  that  which  is  reached  by 
the  patient  application  of  scientific  methods. 
Theories  of  inspiration  are  speculations  as  to  the 
means  by  which  the  authors  of  statements,  in 
the  Bible  or  elsewhere,  have  been  led  to  say  what 
they  have  said  —  and  it  assumes  that  natural 
agencies  are  insufficient  for  the  purpose.  I 
prefer  to  stop  short  of  this  problem,  finding  it 
more  profitable  to  undertake  the  inquiry  which 


234    LIGHTS  OF  THE  CHURCH  AND   SCIENCE        VI 

naturally  precedes  it — namely,  Are  these  state- 
ments true  or  false  ?  If  they  are  true,  it  may  be 
worth  while  to  go  into  the  question  of  their 
supernatural  generation;  if  they  are  false,  it 
certainly  is  not  worth  mine. 

Now,  not  only  do  I  hold  it  to  be  proven  that 
the  story  of  the  Deluge  is  a  pure  fiction ;  but  I 
have  no  hesitation  in  affirming  the  same  thing  oi 
the  story  of  the  Creation.^  Between  these  two 
lies  the  story  of  the  creation  of  man  and  woman 
and  their  fall  from  primitive  innocence,  which  is 
even  more  monstrously  improbable  than  either  of 
the  other  two,  though,  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 
it  is  not  so  easily  capable  of  direct  refutation.  It 
can  be  demonstrated  that  the  earth  took  longer 
than  six  days  in  the  making,  and  that  the 
Deluge,  as  described,  is  a  physical  impossibility  ; 
but  there  is  no  proving,  especially  to  those  who 
are  perfect  in  the  art  of  closing  their  ears  to  that 
which  they  do  not  wish  to  hear,  that  a  snake  did 
not  speak,  or  that  Eve  was  not  made  out  of  one 
of  Adam's  ribs. 

^  So  far  as  I  know,  tbe  narrative  of  the  Creation  is  not  now 
held  to  be  true,  in  the  sense  in  which  I  have  defined  historical 
tnith,  by  any  of  the  reconcilers.  As  for  the  attempts  to  stretch 
the  Pentatenchal  days  into  periods  of  thousands  or  millions  of 
years,  the  verdict  of  the  eminent  Biblical  scholar,  Dr.  Riehm 
{T>er  biblische  Schopfungsbericht,  1881,  pp.  15,  16),  on  such 
pranks  of  "  Auslegungskunst "  should  be  final.  Why  do  the 
reconcilers  take  Goethe's  advice  seriously  ? — 

**  Im  Auslegen  seyd  frisch  und  munter  ! 
Legt  ihr's  nicht  aus,  so  legt  was  uuter." 


VI       LIGHTS    OF   THE   CHUllCH   AND   SCIENCE      235 

The  compiler  of  Genesis,  in  its  present  form, 
evidently  had  a  definite  plan  in  his  mind.  His 
countrymen,  like  all  other  men,  were  doubtless 
curious  to  know  how  the  world  began  ;  how  men, 
and  especially  wicked  men,  came  into  being,  and 
how  existing  nations  and  races  arose  among  the 
descendants  of  one  stock;  and,  finally,  what 
was  the  history  of  their  own  particular  tribe. 
They,  like  ourselves,  desired  to  solve  the  four 
great  problems  of  cosmogony,  anthropogeny, 
ethnogeny,  and  geneogeny.  The  Pentateuch  fur- 
nishes the  solutions  which  appeared  satisfactory 
to  its  author.  One  of  these,  as  we  have  seen, 
was  borrowed  from  a  Babylonian  fable;  and  I 
know  of  no  reason  to  suspect  any  different  origin 
for  the  rest.  Now,  I  would  ask,  is  the  story  of 
the  fabrication  of  Eve  to  be  regarded  as  one  of 
those  pre-Abrahamic  narratives,  tlie  historical 
truth  of  which  is  an  open  question,  in  face  of  the 
reference  to  it  in  a  speech  unhappily  famous  for 
the  legal  oppression  to  which  it  has  been  wrong- 
fully forced  to  lend  itself? 

Have  ye  not  read,  that  lie  which  made  them  from  the  he- 
ginning  made  them  male  and  female,  and  said,  For  this  cause 
shall  a  man  leave  his  father  and  mother,  and  cleave  to  his  wife  ; 
and  the  twain  shall  become  one  flesh  ?  (Matt.  xix.  5.) 


If  divine  authority  is  not  here  claimed  for  the 
twenty-fourth   verse   of    the    second    chapter    of 


23G      LIGHTS   OF  THE   CHURCH   AND   SCIENCE      vi 

Genesis,  what  is  the  value  of  language  ?  And 
again,  I  ask,  if  one  may  play  fast  and  loose  with 
the  story  of  the  Fall  as  a  "  type  "  or  "  allegory," 
what  becomes  of  the  foundation  of  Pauline 
theology  ? — 

For  since  by  man  came  death,  by  man  came  also  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead.  For  as  in  Adam  all  die,  so  also  in  Christ  shall 
all  be  made  alive  (1  Corinthians  xv.  21,  22). 

If  Adam  may  be  held  to  be  no  more  real  a 
personage  than  Prometheus,  and  if  the  story  of 
the  Fall  is  merely  an  instructive  "type,"  com- 
parable to  the  profound  Promethean  mythus, 
what  value  has  Paul's  dialectic  ? 

While,  therefore,  every  right-minded  man  must 
sympathise  with  the  efforts  of  those  theologians, 
who  have  not  been  able  altogether  to  close  their 
ears  to  the  still,  small,  voice  of  reason,  to  escape 
from  the  fetters  which  ecclesiasticism  has  forged ; 
the  melancholy  fact  remains,  that  the  position 
they  have  taken  up  is  hopelessly  untenable.  It 
is  raked  alike  by  the  old-fashioned  artillery  of  the 
Churches  and  by  the  fatal  weapons  of  precision 
with  which  the  en/ants  perdus  of  the  advancing 
forces  of  science  are  armed.  They  must  surrender, 
or  fall  back  into  a  more  sheltered  position.  And 
it  is  possible  that  they  may  long  find  safety  in 
such  retreat. 

It  is,  indeed,  probable  that  the  proportional 
number  of  those  who  will  distinctly  profess  their 


VI       LIGHTS   OF   THE   CHURCH  AND   SCIENCE      237 

belief  in  the  transubstantiation  of  Lot's  wife,  and 
the  anticipatory  experience  of  submarine  naviga- 
tion by  Jonah  ;  in  water  standing  fathoms  deep 
on  the  side  of  a  declivity  without  anything  to 
hold  it  up;  and  in  devils  who  enter  swine — will 
not  increase.  But  neither  is  there  ground  for 
much  hope  that  the  proportion  of  those  who  cast 
aside  these  fictions  and  adopt  the  consequence  of 
that  repudiation,  are,  for  some  generations,  likely 
to  constitute  a  majority.  Our  age  is  a  day  of 
compromises.  The  present  and  the  near  future 
seem  given  over  to  those  happily,  if  curiously, 
constituted  people  who  see  as  little  difficulty  in 
throwing  aside  any  amount  of  post-Abrahamic 
Scriptural  narrative,  as  the  authors  of"  Lux  Mundi" 
see  in  sacrificing  the  pre-Abrahamic  stories  ;  and, 
having  distilled  away  every  inconvenient  matter 
of  fact  in  Christian  history,  continue  to  pay  divine 
honours  to  the  residue.  There  really  seems  to  be 
no  reason  why  the  next  generation  should  not 
listen  to  a  Bampton  Lecture  modelled  upon  that 
addressed  to  the  last : — 

Time  was — and  that  not  very  long  ago — when  all  the  rela- 
tions of  Biblical  authors  concerning  the  Avhole  world  were  re- 
ceived with  a  ready  belief ;  and  an  unreasoning  and  uncritical 
faith  accepted  with  equal  satisfaction  the  narrative  of  the 
Captivity  and  the  doings  of  Mosps  at  the  court  of  Pharaoh,  the 
account  of  the  Apostolic  meeting  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians, 
and  that  of  the  fabrication  of  Eve.  We  can  most  of  us  re- 
member when,  in  this  country,  the  whole  story  of  the  Exodus, 
and  even  the  legend  of  Jonah,  were  seriously  placed  before  boyi 


238    LIGHTS   OF  THE   CHURCH  AND   SCIENCE        VI 

as  liistory,  and  discoursed  of  in  as  dogmatic  a  tone  as  the  tale 
of  Agincourt  or  the  history  of  the  Norman  Conquest. 

But  all  this  is  now  changed.  The  last  century  has  seen  the 
growth  of  scientific  criticism  to  its  full  strength.  The  whole 
world  of  history  has  been  revolutionised  and  the  mythology 
which  embarrassed  earnest  Christians  has  vanished  as  an  evil 
mist,  the  lifting  of  which  has  only  more  fully  revealed  the 
lineaments  of  infallible  Truth.  No  longer  in  contact  with  fact 
of  any  kind,  Faith  stands  now  and  for  ever  proudly  inaccessible 
to  the  attacks  of  the  infidel. 

So  far  the  apologist  of  the  future.  Why  not  I 
Cantdbit  'vacuus. 


YII 

HASISADRA'S  ADYENTUPvE 

[1891] 

Some  thousands  of  years  ago  there  was  a  city  in 
Mesopotamia  called  Surippak.  One  night  a 
strange  dream  came  to  a  dweller  therein,  whose 
name,  if  rightly  reported,  was  Hasisadra.  The 
dream  foretold  the  speedy  coming  of  a  great 
flood ;  and  it  warned  Hasisadra  to  lose  no  time 
in  building  a  ship,  in  which,  when  notice  was 
given,  he,  his  family  and  friends,  with  their  do- 
mestic animals  and  a  collection  of  wild  creatures 
and  seed  of  plants  of  the  land,  might  take  refuge 
and  be  rescued  from  destruction.  Hasisadra 
awoke,  and  at  once  acted  upon  the  warning.  A 
strong  decked  ship  was  built,  and  her  sides  were 
paid,  inside  and  out,  with  the  mineral  pitch,  or 
bitumen,  with  which  the  country  abounded ;  the 
vessel's  seaworthiness  was  tested,  the  cargo  was 
stowed  away,  and  a  trusty  pilot  or  steersmaa 
appointed. 


240  hasisadra's  adventure  vh 

The  promised  signal  arrived.  Wife  and  friends 
embarked  ;  Hasisadra,  following,  prudently  "  shut 
the  door,"  or,  as  we  should  say,  put  on  the 
hatches ;  and  Nes-Hea,  the  pilot,  was  left  alone 
on  deck  to  do  his  best  for  the  ship.  Thereupon 
a  hurricane  began  to  rage  ;  rain  fell  in  torrents ; 
the  subterranean  waters  burst  forth ;  a  deluge 
swept  over  the  land,  and  the  wind  lashed  it  into 
waves  sky  high ;  heaven  and  earth  became 
mingled  in  chaotic  gloom.  For  six  days  and 
seven  nights  the  gale  raged,  but  the  good  ship 
held  out  until,  on  the  seventh  day,  the  storm 
lulled.  Hasisadra  ventured  on  deck  ;  and,  seeing 
nothing  but  a  waste  of  waters  strewed  with 
floating  corpses  and  wreck,  wept  over  the  de- 
struction of  his  land  and  people.  Far  away,  the 
mountains  of  Nizir  were  visible ;  the  ship  was 
steered  for  them  and  ran  aground  upon  the 
higher  land.  Yet  another  seven  days  passed  by. 
On  the  seventh,  Hasisadra  sent  forth  a  dove, 
which  found  no  resting  place  and  returned  ;  then 
he  liberated  a  swallow,  which  also  came  back  ; 
finally,  a  raven  was  let  loose,  and  that  sagacious 
bird,  when  it  found  that  the  water  had  abated, 
came  near  the  ship,  but  refused  to  return  to  it. 
Upon  this,  Hasisadra  liberated  the  rest  of  the 
wild  animals,  which  immediately  dispersed  in  all 
directions,  while  he,  with  his  family  and  friends, 
ascending  a  mountain  hard  by,  offered  sacrifice 
upon  its  summit  to  the  gods. 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  241 

The  story  thus  given  in  summary  abstract,  told 
in  an  ancient  Semitic  "dialect,  is  inscribed  in 
cuneiform  characters  upon  a  tablet  of  burnt  clay. 
Many  thousands  of  such  tablets,  collected  by 
Assurbanipal,  King  of  Assyria  in  the  middle  of 
the  seventh  century  B.C.,  were  stored  in  the 
library  of  his  palace  at  Nineveh  ;  and,  though  in 
a  sadly  broken  and  mutilated  condition,  they  have 
yielded  a  marvellous  amount  of  information  to 
the  patient  and  sagacious  labour  which  modern 
scholars  have  bestowed  upon  them.  Among  the 
multitude  of  documents  of  various  kinds,  this 
narrative  of  Hasisadra's  adventure  has  been  found 
in  a  tolerably  complete  state.  But  Assyriologists 
agree  that  it  is  only  a  copy  of  a  much  more 
ancient  work ;  and  there  are  weighty  reasons  for 
believing  that  the  story  of  Hasisadra's  flood  was 
well  known  in  Mesopotamia  before  the  year 
2000  B.C. 

No  doubt,  then,  we  are  in  presence  of  a 
narrative  which  has  all  the  authority  which 
antiquity  can  confer;  and  it  is  proper  to  deal 
respectfully  with  it,  even  though  it  is  quite  as 
proper,  and  indeed  necessary,  to  act  no  less 
respectfully  towards  ourselves;  and,  before  pro- 
fessing to  put  implicit  faith  in  it,  to  inquire  what 
claim  it  has  to  be  regarded  as  a  serious  account  of 
an  historical  event. 

It  is  of  no  use  to  appeal  to  contemporary 
history,  although  the  annals  of  Babylonia,  no  less 

105 


242  HASISADRA'S   adventure  VTl 

than  those  of  Egypt,  go  much  further  back  than 
2000  B.C.  All  that  can  be  said  is,  that  the 
former  are  hardly  consistent  with  the  supposition 
that  any  catastrophe,  competent  to  destroy  all  the 
population,  has  befallen  the  land  since  civilisation 
began,  and  that  the  latter  are  notoriously  silent 
about  deluges.  In  such  a  case  as  this,  however, 
the  silence  of  history  does  not  leave  the  inquirer 
wholly  at  fault.  Natural  science  has  something 
to  say  when  the  phenomena  of  nature  are  in 
question.  Natural  science  may  be  able  to  show, 
from  the  nature  of  the  country,  either  that  such 
an  event  as  that  described  in  the  story  is 
impossible,  or  at  any  rate  highly  improbable ;  or, 
on  the  other  hand,  that  it  is  consonant  with 
probability.  In  the  former  case,  the  narrative 
must  be  suspected  or  rejected ;  in  the  latter,  no 
such  summary  verdict  can  be  given :  on  the 
contrary,  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  story  may 
be  true.  And  then,  if  certain  strangely  prevalent 
canons  of  criticism  are  accepted,  and  if  the 
evidence  that  an  event  might  have  happened  is 
to  be  accepted  as  proof  that  it  did  happen, 
Assyriologists  will  be  at  liberty  to  congratulate 
one  another  on  the  "  confirmation  by  modern 
science "  of  the  authority  of  their  ancient 
books. 

It  will  be  interesting,  therefore,  to  inquire  how- 
far  the  physical  structure  and  the  other  conditions 
of  the  region  in  which  Surippak  was  situated  are 


vn 


HASISADRA^S   ADVENTURE  243 


compatible   with  sucli  a  flood  as   is  described  ia 
the  Assyrian  record. 

The  scene  of  Hasisadra's  adventure  is  laid  in 
the  broad  valley,  six  or  seven  hundred  miles  long, 
and  hardly  anywhere  less  than  a  hundred  miles 
in  width,  which  is  traversed  by  the  lower  courses 
of  the  rivers  Euphrates  and  Tigris,  and  which 
is  commonly  known  as  the  "Euphrates  valley." 
Rising,  at  the  one  end,  into  a  hill  country,  which 
gradually  passes  into  the  Alpine  heights  of 
Armenia ;  and,  at  the  other,  dipping  beneath  the 
shallow  waters  of  the  head  of  the  Persian  Gulf, 
which  continues  in  the  same  direction,  from 
north-west  to  south-east,  for  some  eight  hundred 
miles  farther,  the  floor  of  the  valley  presents  a 
gradual  slope,  from  eight  hundred  feet  above  the 
sea  level  to  the  depths  of  the  southern  end  of  the 
Persian  Gulf,  The  boundary  between  sea  and 
land,  formed  by  the  extremest  mudflats  of  the 
delta  of  the  two  rivers,  is  but  vaguely  defined ; 
and,  year  by  year,  it  advances  seaward.  On  the 
north-eastern  side,  the  western  frontier  ranges  of 
Persia  rise  abruptly  to  great  heights;  on  the 
south-western  side,  a  more  gradual  ascent  leads  to 
a  table-land  of  less  elevation,  which,  very  broad 
in  the  south,  where  it  is  occupied  by  the  deserts 
of  Arabia  and  of  Southern  Syria,  narrows,  north- 
wards, into  the  highlands  of  Palestine,  and  is  con- 
tinued by  the  ranges  of  the  Lebanon,  the  Antileba- 
non,  and  the  Taurus,  into  the  highlands  of  Armenia, 


244<  hastsadea's  adventure  vir 

The  wide  and  gently  inclined  plain,  thus  in- 
closed between  the  gulf  and  the  highlands,  on  each 
side  and  at  its  upper  extremity,  is  distinguishable 
into  two  regions  of  very  different  character,  one  of 
which  lies  north,  and  the  other  south  of  the  parallel 
of  Hit,  on  the  Euphrates.  Except  in  the  imme- 
diate vicinity  of  the  river,  the  northern  division  is 
stony  and  scantily  covered  with  vegetation,  except 
in  spring.  Over  the  southern  division,  on  the  con- 
trary, spreads  a  deep  alluvial  soil,  in  which  even  a 
pebble  is  rare  ;  and  which,  though,  under  the  exist- 
ing misrule,  mainly  a  waste  of  marsh  and  wilderness, 
needs  only  intelligent  attention  to  become,  as  it 
was  of  old,  the  granary  of  western  Asia.  Except 
in  the  extreme  south,  the  rainfall  is  small  and  the 
air  dry.  The  heat  in  summer  is  intense,  while 
bitterly  cold  northern  blasts  sweep  the  plain  in 
winter.  Whirlwinds  are  not  uncommon ;  and,  in 
the  intervals  of  the  periodical  inundations,  the  fine, 
dry,  powdery  soil  is  swept,  even  by  moderate  breezes, 
into  stiflino^  clouds,  or  rather  fof^s,  of  dust.  Low 
inequalities,  elevations  here  and  depressions  there, 
diversify  the  surface  of  the  alluvial  region.  The 
latter  are  occupied  by  enormous  marshes,  while  the 
former  support  the  permanent  dwellings  of  the 
present  scanty  and  miserable  population. 

In  antiquity,  so  long  as  the  canalisation  of  the 
country  was  properly  carried  out,  the  fertility  of 
the  alluvial  plain  enabled  great  and  prosperous 
nations   to   have   their   home   in  the   Euphrates 


VII  HASISADRA*S   ADVENTURE  245 

valley.  Its  abundant  clay  furnished  the  materials 
for  the  masses  of  sun-dried  and  burnt  bricks,  the 
remains  of  which,  in  the  shape  of  huge  artificial 
mounds,  still  testify  to  both  the  magnitude  and  the 
industry  of  the  population,  thousands  of  years  ago. 
Good  cement  is  plentiful,  while  the  bitumen,  which 
wells  from  the  rocks  at  Hit  and  elsewhere,  not  only 
answers  the  same  purpose,  but  is  used  to  this  day, 
as  it  Avas  in  Hasisadra's  time,  to  pay  the  inside 
and  the  outside  of  boats. 

In  the  broad  lower  course  of  the  Euphrates,  the 
stream  rarely  acquires  a  velocity  of  more  than 
three  miles  an  hour,  while  the  lower  Tigris  attains 
double  that  rate  in  times  of  flood.  The  water  of 
both  great  rivers  is  mainly  derived  from  the 
northern  and  eastern  highlands  in  Armenia  and 
in  Kurdistan,  and  stands  at  its  lowest  level  in 
early  autumn  and  in  January.  But  when  the 
snows  accumulated  in  the  upper  basins  of  the  great 
rivers,  during  the  winter,  melt  under  the  hot  sun- 
shine of  spring,  they  rapidly  rise,^  and  at  length 
overflow  their  banks,  covering  the  alluvial  plain 
with  a  vast  inland  sea,  interrupted  only  by  the 
higher  ridges  and  hummocks  which  form  islands  in 
a  seemingly  boundless  expanse  of  water. 

In  the  occurrence  of  these  annual  inundations 


1  In  May  1849  the  Tigris  at  Bagdad  rose  22^  feet— 5  feet 
above  its  usual  rise — and  nearly  swept  away  the  town.  In  1831 
a  similarly  exceptional  flood  did  immense  damage,  destroying 
7000  houses.     See  Loftus,  CJialdea  and  Sv^iana,  p.  7. 


246  hasisadra's  adventure  vn 

lies  one  of  several  resemblances  between  the  valley 
of  the  Euphrates  and  that  of  the  Nile.  But  there 
are  important  differences.  The  time  of  the  annual 
flood  is  reversed,  the  Nile  being  highest  in  autumn 
and  winter,  and  lowest  in  spring  and  early- 
summer.  The  periodical  overflows  of  the  Nile, 
regulated  by  the  gi'eat  lake  basins  in  the  south, 
are  usually  punctual  in  arrival,  gradual  in  growth, 
and  beneficial  in  operation.  No  lakes  are  inter- 
posed between  the  mountain  torrents  of  the  upper 
basis  of  the  Tigris  and  the  Euphrates  and  their 
lower  courses.  Hence,  heavy  rain,  or  an  unusually 
rapid  thaw  in  the  uplands,  gives  rise  to  the  sudden 
irruption  of  a  vast  volume  of  water  which  not 
even  the  rapid  Tigris,  still  less  its  more  sluggish 
companion,  can  carry  off  in  time  to  prevent  violent 
and  dangerous  overflows.  Without  an  elaborate 
system  of  canalisation,  providing  an  escape  for 
such  sudden  excesses  of  the  supply  of  water,  the 
annual  floods  of  the  Euphrates,  and  especially  of 
the  Tigris,  must  always  be  attended  with  risk,  and 
often  prove  harmful. 

There  are  other  peculiarities  of  the  Euphrates 
valley  which  may  occasionally  tend  to  exacerbate 
the  evils  attendant  on  the  inundations.  It  is  very 
subject  to  seismic  disturbances  ;  and  the  ordinary 
consequences  of  a  sharp  earthquake  shock  might 
be  seriously  complicated  by  its  effect  on  a  broad 
sheet  of  water.  Moreover  the  Indian  Ocean  lies 
within  the  region  of  typhoons ;  and  if,  at  the  height 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  247 

of  an  inundation,  a  hurricane  from  the  south-east 
swept  up  the  Persian  Gulf,  driving  its  shallow 
waters  upon  the  delta  and  damming  back  the  out- 
flow, perhaps  for  hundreds  of  miles  up-stream,  a 
diluvial  catastrophe,  fairly  up  to  the  mark  of 
Hasisadra's,  might  easily  result.^ 

Thus  there  seems  to  be  no  valid  reason  for  re- 
jecting Hasisadra's  story  on  physical  grounds.  I 
do  not  gather  from  the  narrative  that  the  "  moun- 
tains of  Nizir  "  were  supposed  to  be  submerged,  but 
merely  that  they  came  into  view  above  the  distant 
horizon  of  the  waters,  as  the  vessel  drove  in  that 
direction.  Certainly  the  ship  is  not  supposed  to 
ground  on  any  of  their  higher  summits,  for  Hasisadra 
has  to  ascend  a  peak  in  order  to  offer  his  sacrifice. 
The  country  of  Nizir  lay  on  the  north-eastern  side 
of  the  Euphrates  valley,  about  the  courses  of  the 
two  rivers  Zab,  which  enter  the  Tigris  where  it 
traverses  the  plain  of  Assyria  some  eight  or  nine 
hundred  feet  above  the  sea;  and,  so  far  as  I  can  judge 
from  maps  ^  and  other  sources  of  information,  it  is 
possible,  under  the  circumstances  supjDosed,  that 
such  a  ship  as  Hasisadra's  might  drive  before  a 

^  See  the  instructive  chapter  on  Hasisadra's  flood  in  Suess, 
Das  Antlitz  dcr  Erde,  Abth.  I.  Only  fifteen  years  ago  a 
cyclone  in  the  Bay  of  Bengal  gave  rise  to  a  flood  which  covered 
3000  square  miles  of  the  delta  of  the  Ganges,  3  to  45  feet 
deep,  destroying  100,000  people,  innumerable  cattle,  houses, 
and  trees.  It  broke  inland,  on  the  rising  ground  of  Tipperah, 
and  may  have  swept  a  vessel  from  the  sea  that  far,  though  I  do 
not  know  that  it  did. 

^  See  Cernik's  maps  in  Pctermanns  Mittheilungen, 
Ergiinziingshefte  44  and  45,  1875-76. 


248  hasisadra's  advexture  vn 

southerly  gale,  over  a  continuously  flooded  country, 
until  it  grounded  on  some  of  the  low  hills  between 
which  both  the  lower  and  the  upper  Zab  enter 
upon  the  Assyrian  plain. 

The  tablet  which  contains  the  story  under 
consideration  is  the  eleventh  of  a  series  of  twelve. 
Each  of  these  answers  to  a  month,  and  to  the 
corresponding  sign  of  the  Zodiac.  The  Assyrian 
year  began  with  the  spring  equinox ;  consequently, 
the  eleventh  month,  called  "the  rainy,"  answers 
to  our  January-February,  and  to  the  sign  which 
corresponds  Avith  our  Aquarius.  The  aquatic 
adventure  of  Hasisadra,  therefore,  is  not  inap- 
propriately placed.  It  is  curious,  however,  that 
the  season  thus  indirectly  assigned  to  the  flood  is 
not  that  of  the  present  highest  level  of  the  rivers. 
It  is  too  late  for  the  winter  rise  and  too  early  for 
the  spring  floods. 

I  think  it  must  be  admitted  that,  so  far,  the 
physical  cross-examination  to  which  Hasisadra  has 
been  subjected  does  not  break  down  his  story.  On 
the  contrary,  he  proves  to  have  kept  it  in  all 
essential  respects  ^  within  the  bounds  of  probability 
or  possibility.  However,  we  have  not  yet  done 
with  him.  For  the  conditions  which  obtained  in 
the  Euphrates  valley,  four  or  five  thousand  years 

^  I  have  not  cited  the  dimensions  given  to  the  ships  in  most 
translations  of  the  story,  because  there  appears  to  be  a  doubt 
about  tliem.  HeLU-pt  (KeiUnschrifUiche  Sindjluth-Bericht,  p.  13) 
Bays  tliat  the  figures  are  illegible. 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  240 

ago,  may  have  differed  to  such  an  extent  from 
those  which  now  exist  that  we  should  be  able  to 
convict  him  of  having  made  up  his  tale.  But 
here  again  everything  is  in  favour  of  his  credibility. 
Indeed,  he  may  claim  very  powerful  support,  for 
it  does  not  lie  in  the  mouths  of  those  who  accept 
the  authority  of  the  Pentateuch  to  deny  that  the 
Euphrates  valley  was  what  it  is,  even  six  thousand 
years  back.  According  to  the  book  of  Genesis, 
Phrat  and  Hiddekel — the  Euphrates  and  the 
Tigris — are  coeval  with  Paradise.  An  edition  of 
the  Scriptures,  recently  published  under  high 
authority,  with  an  elaborate  apparatus  of  "  Helps  " 
for  the  use  of  students — and  therefore,  as  I  am 
bound  to  suppose,  purged  of  all  statements  that 
could  by  any  possibility  mislead  the  young — 
assigns  the  year  B.C.  4004  as  the  date  of  Adam's 
too  brief  residence  in  that  locality. 

But  I  am  far  from  depending  on  this  authority 
for  the  age  of  the  Mesopotamian  plain.  On  the 
contrary,  I  venture  to  rely,  with  much  more  con- 
fidence, on  another  kind  of  evidence,  which  tends 
to  show  that  the  age  of  the  great  rivers  must  be 
carried  back  to  a  date  earlier  than  that  at  which 
our  ingenuous  youth  is  instructed  that  the  earth 
came  into  existence.  For,  the  alluvial  deposit 
having  been  brought  down  by  the  rivers,  they 
must  needs  be  older  than  the  plain  it  forms,  as 
navvies  must  needs  antecede  the  embankment 
painfully  built  up  by  the  contents  of  their  wheel- 


250  hasisadea's  adventure  vii 

barrows.  For  thousands  of  years,  heat  and  cold, 
rain,  snow,  and  frost,  the  scrubbing  of  glaciers, 
and  the  scouring  of  torrents  laden  with  sand  and 
gravel,  have  been  wearing  down  the  rocks  of  the 
upper  basins  of  the  rivers,  over  an  area  of  many 
thousand  square  miles  ;  and  these  materials, 
ground  to  fine  powder  in  the  course  of  their  long 
journey,  have  slowly  subsided,  as  the  water  which 
carried  them  spread  out  and  lost  its  velocity  in 
the  sea.  It  is  because  this  process  is  still  going 
on  that  the  shore  of  the  delta  constantly  en- 
croaches on  the  head  of  the  gulf^  into  which  the 
two  rivers  are  constantly  throwing  the  waste  of 
Armenia  and  of  Kurdistan.  Hence,  as  might  be 
expected,  fluviatile  and  marine  shells  are  common 
in  the  alluvial  deposit ;  and  Loftus  found  strata, 
containing  subfossil  marine  shells  of  species  now 
livinof,  in  the  Persian  Gulf,  at  Warka,  two  hundred 
miles  in  a  straight  line  from  the  shore  of  the 
delta.-  It  follows  that,  if  a  trustworthy  estimate 
of  the  average  rate  of  growth  of  the  alluvial 
can  be  formed,  the  lowest  limit  (by  no  means  the 
highest  limit)  of  age  of  the  rivers  can  be  deter- 
mined.   All  such  estimates  are  beset  with  sources 

1  It  is  probable  that  a  slow  movement  of  elevation  of  the  land 
at  one  time  contributed  to  the  result — isrhaps  does  so  still. 

-  At  a  comparatively  recent  period,  the  littoral  margin  of  the 
Persian  Gulf  extended  certainly  250  miles  farther  to  the  north- 
west than  the  present  embouchure  of  the  Shatt-el  Arab. 
(Loitns,  Quarterly  Journal  of  the  Geological  Society,  1853, 
p.  251.)  The  actual  extent  of  the  marine  deposit  inland  cannot 
be  dclined,  as  it  is  covered  by  later  fluviatile  deposits. 


vir  hasisadra's  adventure  251 

of  error  of  very  various  kinds  ;  and  the  best  of 
them  can  only  be  regarded  as  approximations  to 
the  truth.  But  I  think  it  will  be  quite  safe  to 
assume  a  maximum  rate  of  growth  of  four  miles  in 
a  century  for  the  lower  half  of  the  alluvial  plain. 

Now,  the  cycle  of  narratives  of  which  Hasisadra's 
adventure  forms  a  part  contains  allusions  not  only 
to  Surippak,  the  exact  position  of  which  is  doubt- 
ful, but  to  other  cities,  such  as  Erech.  The  vast 
ruins  at  the  present  village  of  Warka  have  been 
carefully  explored  and  determined  to  be  all  that 
remains  of  that  once  great  and  flourishing  city, 
*' Erech  the  lofty."  Supposing  that  the  two 
hundred  miles  of  alluvial  country,  which  separates 
them  from  the  head  of  the  Persian  Gulf  at 
present,  have  been  deposited  at  the  very  high 
rate  of  four  miles  in  a  century,  it  will  follow  that 
4000  years  ago,  or  about  the  year  2100  B.C.,  the 
city  of  Erech  still  lay  forty  miles  inland.  Indeed, 
the  city  might  have  been  built  a  thousand  years 
earlier.  Moreover,  there  is  plenty  of  independent 
archaeological  and  other  evidence  that  in  the 
whole  thousand  years,  2000  to  3000  B.C.,  the 
alluvial  plain  was  inhabited  by  a  numerous 
people,  among  whom  industry,  art,  and  literature 
had  attained  a  very  considerable  development. 
And  it  can  be  shown  that  the  physical  conditions 
and  the  climate  of  the  Euphrates  valley,  at  that 
time,  must  have  been  extremely  similar  to  what 
they  are  now. 


252  hasisadra's  adventure  vu 

Thus,  once  more,  we  reach  the  conclusion  that, 
as  a  question  of  physical  probability,  there  is  no 
ground  for  objecting  to  the  reality  of  Hasisadra's 
adventure.  It  would  be  unreasonable  to  doubt 
that  such  a  flood  might  have  happened,  and  that 
such  a  person  might  have  escaped  in  the  way 
described,  any  time  during  the  last  5000  years. 
And  if  the  postulate  of  loose  thinkers  in  search  of 
scientific  "  confirmations  "  of  questionable  narra- 
tives— proof  that  an  event  may  have  happened  is 
evidence  that  it  did  happen — is  to  be  accepted, 
surely  Hasisadra's  story  is  "  confirmed  by  modem 
scientific  investigation  "  beyond  all  cavil.  How- 
ever, it  may  be  well  to  pause  before  adopting  this 
conclusion,  because  the  original  story,  of  which  I 
have  set  forth  only  the  broad  outlines,  contains  a 
great  many  statements  which  rest  upon  just  the 
same  foundation  as  those  cited,  and  yet  are  hardly 
likely  to  meet  with  general  acceptance.  The 
account  of  the  circumstances  which  led  up  to  the 
flood,  of  those  under  which  Hasisadra's  adventure 
was  made  known  to  his  descendant,  of  certain 
remarkable  incidents  before  and  after  the  flood, 
are  inseparably  bound  up  with  the  details  already 
given.  And  I  am  unable  to  discover  any  justifi- 
cation for  arbitrarily  picking  out  some  of  these 
and  dubbing  them  historical  verities,  while  reject- 
ing the  rest  as  legendary  fictions.  They  stand  or 
fall  together. 

Before  proceeding  to  the  consideration  of  these 


vn  hasisadra's  adventure  253 

less  satisfactory  details,  it  is  needful  to  remark 
that  Hasisadra's  adventure  is  a  mere  episode  in  a 
cycle  of  stories  of  which  a  personage,  whose  name 
is  provisionally  read  "  Izdubar,"  is  the  centre. 
The  nature  of  Izdubar  hovers  vaguely  between 
the  heroic  and  the  divine ;  sometimes  he  seems  a 
mere  man,  sometimes  approaches  so  closely  to  the 
divinities  of  fire  and  of  the  sun  as  to  be  hardly 
distinguishable  from  them.  As  I  have  already 
mentioned,  the  tablet  which  sets  forth  Hasisadra's 
perils  is  one  of  twelve  ;  and,  since  each  of  these 
represents  a  month  and  bears  a  story  appropriate 
to  the  corresponding  sign  of  the  Zodiac,  great 
weight  must  be  attached  to  Sir  Henry  Rawlin- 
son's  suggestion  that  the  epos  of  Izdubar  is  a 
poetical  embodiment  of  solar  mythology. 

Iq  the  earlier  books  of  the  epos,  the  hero,  not 
content  with  rejecting  the  proffered  love  of  the 
Chaldsean  Aphrodite,  Istar,  freely  expresses  his 
very  low  estimate  of  her  character  ;  and  it  is 
interesting  to  observe  that,  even  in  this  early 
stage  of  human  experience,  men  had  reached  a 
conception  of  that  law  of  nature  which  expresses 
the  inevitable  consequences  of  an  imperfect  appre- 
ciation of  feminine  charms.  The  injured  goddess 
makes  Izdubar's  life  a  burden  to  him,  until  at 
last,  sick  in  body  and  sorry  in  mind,  he  is  driven 
tc  seek  aid  and  comfort  from  his  forbears  in  the 
world  of  spirits.  So  this  antitype  of  Odysseus 
journeys  to  the  shore  of  the  waters  of  death,  and 


254  HASISADRA'S  ADVENTURE  VH 

there  takes  ship  with  a  Chaldsean  Charon,  who 
carries  him  within  hail  of  his  ancestor  Hasisadra. 
That  venerable  personage  not  only  gives  Izdubar 
instructions  how  to  regain  his  health,  but  tells 
him,  somewhat  a  propos  des  huttes  (after  the 
manner  of  venerable  personages),  the  long  story 
•of  his  perilous  adventure  ;  and  how  it  befell  that 
he,  his  wife,  and  his  steersman  came  to  dwell 
among  the  blessed  gods,  without  passing  through 
the  portals  of  death  like  ordinary  mortals. 

According  to  the  full  story,  the  sins  of  mankind 
had  become  grievous  ;  and,  at  a  council  of  the  gods, 
it  was  resolved  to  extirpate  the  whole  race  by  a 
great  flood.  And,  once  more,  let  us  note  the  uni- 
formity of  human  experience.  It  would  appear 
that,  four  thousand  years  ago,  the  obligations  of 
confidential  intercourse  about  matters  of  state  were 
sometimes  violated — of  course  from  the  best  of 
motives.  Ea,  one  of  the  three  chiefs  of  the  Chal- 
dsean Pantheon,  the  god  of  justice  and  of  practical 
wisdom,  was  also  the  god  of  the  sea  ;  and,  yielding 
to  the  temptation  to  do  a  friend  a  good  turn, 
irresistible  to  kindly  seafaring  folks  of  all  ranks, 
he  warned  Hasisadra  of  what  was  coming.  When 
Bel  subsequently  reproached  him  for  this  breach  of 
confidence,  Ea  defended  himself  by  declaring  that 
he  did  not  tell  Hasisadra  anything  ;  he  only  sent 
him  a  dream.  This  was  undoubtedly  sailing  very 
near  the  wind  ;  but  the  attribution  of  a  little 
benevolent  obliquity  of   conduct  to   one  of   the 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  255 

highest  of  the  gods  is  a  trifle  compared  with  the 
truly  Homeric  anthropomorphism  which  charac- 
terises other  parts  of  the  epos. 

The  Chaldsean  deities  are,  in  truth,  extremely 
human  ;  and,  occasionally,  the  narrator  does  not 
scruple  to  represent  them  in  a  manner  which  is  not 
only  inconsistent  with  our  idea  of  reverence,  hut  is 
sometimes  distinctly  humorous.^  When  the  storm 
is  at  its  height,  he  exhibits  them  flying  in  a  state 
of  panic  to  Anu,  the  god  of  heaven,  and  crouch- 
ing before  his  portal  like  frightened  dogs.  As  the 
smoke  of  Hasisadra's  sacrifice  arises,  the  gods, 
attracted  by  the  sweet  savour,  are  compared  to 
swarms  of  flies.  I  have  already  remarked  that 
the  lady  Istar's  reputation  is  torn  to  shreds  ;  while 
she  and  Ea  scold  Bel  handsomely  for  his  ferocity 
and  injustice  in  destroying  the  innocent  along  with 
the  guilty.  One  is  reminded  of  Here  hung  up 
with  weighted  heels  ;  of  misleading  dreams  sent 
by  Zeus ;  of  Ares  howling  as  he  flies  from  the 
Trojan  battlefield  ;  and  of  the  very  questionable 
dealings  of  Aphrodite  with  Helen  and  Paris. 

But  to  return  to  the  story.  Bel  was,  at  first, 
excluded  from  the  sacrifice  as  the  author  of  all  the 
mischief ;  which  really  was  somewhat  hard  upon 
him,  since  the  other  gods  agreed  to  his  proposal. 
But  eventually  a  reconciliation  takes  place ;  the 
great  bow  of  Anu  is  displayed  in  the  heavens ;  Bel 

^  Tiele    {Bahylonisch-Assyrische   Geschichte,    pp.    572-3)    has 
some  very  just  remarks  on  this  aspect  of  the  epos. 


256  hasisadra's  adventure  vn 

agrees  that  he  will  be  satisfied  with  what  war, 
pestilence,  famine,  and  wild  beasts  can  do  in  the 
v,'ay  of  destroying  men;  and  that,  henceforward, 
he  will  not  have  recourse  to  extraordinary  meas- 
ures. Finally,  it  is  Bel  himself  who,  by  way  of 
making  amends,  transports  Hasisadra,  his  wife,  and 
the  faithful  Nes-Hea  to  the  abode  of  the  gods. 

It  is  as  indubitable  as  it  is  incomprehensible  to 
most  of  us,  that,  for  thousands  of  years,  a  great 
people,  quite  as  intelligent  as  we  are,  and  living  in 
as  high  a  state  of  civilisation  as  that  which  had 
been  attained  in  the  greater  part  of  Europe  a  few 
centuries  ago,  entertained  not  the  slightest  doubt 
that  Anu,  Bel,  Ea,  Tstar,  and  the  rest,  were  real 
personages,  possessed  of  boundless  powers  for  good 
and  evil.  The  sincerity  of  the  monarchs  whose 
inscriptions  gratefully  attribute  their  victories  to 
Merodach,  or  to  Assur,  is  as  little  to  be  questioned 
as  that  of  the  authors  of  the  hymns  and  peniten- 
tial psalms  which  give  full  expression  to  the 
heights  and  depths  of  religious  devotion.  An 
"  infidel  "  bold  enough  to  deny  the  existence,  or  to 
doubt  the  influence,  of  these  deities  probably  did 
not  exist  in  all  Mesopotamia ;  and  even  construc- 
tive rebellion  against  their  authority  was  apt  to 
end  in  the  deprivation,  not  merely  of  the  good 
name,  but  of  the  skin  of  the  offender.  The  adhe- 
rents of  modern  theological  systems  dismiss  these 
objects  of  the  love  and  fear  of  a  hundred  genera- 
tions of   their  equals,  offhand,  as  "  gods   of  the 


vii  hasisadra's  adventure  257 

heathen,"  mere  creations  of  a  wicked  and  idolatrous 
imagination  ;  and,  along  with  them,  they  disown, 
as  senseless,  the  crude  theology,  with  its  gross 
anthropomorphism  and  its  low  ethical  conception 
of  the  divinity,  which  satisfied  the  pious  souls  of 
Chaldsea. 

I  imagine,  though  I  do  not  presume  to  be  sure, 
that  any  endeavour  to  save  the  intellectual  and 
moral  credit  of  Chaldaean  religion,  by  suggesting 
the  application  to  it  of  that  universal  solvent  of 
absurdities,  the  alleojorical  method,  would  be 
scouted  ;  I  will  not  even  suggest  that  any  inge- 
nuity can  be  equal  to  the  discovery  of  the  antitypes 
of  the  personifications  effected  by  the  religious  im- 
agination of  later  ages,  in  the  triad  Anu,  Ea,  and 
Bel,  still  less  in  Istar.  Therefore,  unless  some 
plausible  reconciliatory  scheme  should  be  pro- 
pounded by  a  Neo-Chaldsean  devotee  (and,  with 
Neo-Buddhists  to  the  fore,  this  supposition  is  not 
so  wild  as  it  looks),  I  suppose  the  moderns  will 
continue  to  smile,  m  a  superior  way,  at  the  griev- 
ous absurdity  of  the  polytheistic  idolatry  of  these 
ancient  people. 

It  is  probably  a  congenital  absence  of  some 
faculty  which  I  oughfc  to  possess  which  withholds 
me  from  adopting  this  summary  procedure.  But 
I  am  not  ashamed  to  share  David  Hume's  want  of 
ability  to  discover  that  polytheism  is,  in  itself, 
altogether  absurd.  If  we  are  bound,  or  permitted, 
to  judge  the  government  of  the  world  by  human 

106 


258  hasisadra's  adventure  vn 

standards,  it  appears  to  me  that  directorates  are 
proved,  by  familiar  experience,  to  conduct  the 
largest  and  the  most  complicated  concerns  quite 
as  well  as  solitary  despots.  I  have  never  been  able 
to  see  why  the  hypothesis  of  a  divine  syndicate 
should  be  found  guilty  of  innate  absurdity.  Those 
Assyrians,  in  particular,  who  held  Assur  to  be  the 
one  supreme  and  creative  deity,  to  whom  all  the 
other  supernal  powers  were  subordinate,  might 
fairly  ask  that  the  essential  difference  between 
their  system  and  that  which  obtains  among  the 
great  majority  of  their  modern  theological  critics 
should  be  demonstrated.  In  my  apprehension,  it 
is  not  the  quantity,  but  the  quality,  of  the  persons, 
among  w^hom  the  attributes  of  divinity  are  distri- 
buted, which  is  the  serious  matter.  If  the  divine 
might  is  associated  with  no  higher  ethical  attri- 
butes than  those  which  obtain  among  ordinary 
men ;  if  the  divine  intelligence  is  supposed  to  be 
so  imperfect  that  it  cannot  foresee  the  consequences 
of  its  own  contrivances  ;  if  the  supernal  powers 
can  become  furiously  angry  with  the  creatures  of 
their  omnipotence  and,  in  their  senseless  wrath, 
destroy  the  innocent  along  with  the  guilty ;  or  if 
they  can  show  themselves  to  be  as  easily  placated 
by  presents  and  gross  flattery  as  any  oriental  or 
occidental  despot ;  if,  in  short,  they  are  only 
stronofer  than  mortal  men  and  no  better,  as  it  must 
be  admitted  Hasisadra's  deities  proved  themselves 
to  be — then,  surely,  it  is  time  for  us  to  look  some- 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  259 

what  closely  into  their  credentials,  and  to  accept 
none  but  conclusive  evidence  of  their  existence. 

To  the  majority  of  m}^  respected  contemporaries 
this  reasoning  will  doubtless  appear  feeble,  if  not 
worse.  However,  to  my  mind,  such  are  the  only 
arguments  by  which  the  Chaldsean  theology  can 
be  satisfactorily  upset.  So  far  from  there  being 
any  ground  for  the  belief  that  Ea,  Anu,  and  Bel 
are,  or  ever  were,  real  entities,  it  seems  to  me 
quite  infinitely  more  probable  that  they  are 
products  of  the  religious  imagination,  such  as 
are  to  be  found  everywhere  and  in  all  ages,  so 
long  as  that  imagination  riots  uncontrolled  by 
scientific  criticism. 

It  is  on  these  grounds  that  I  venture,  at  the 
risk  of  being  called  an  atheist  by  the  ghosts  of 
all  the  principals  of  all  the  colleges  of  Babylonia, 
or  by  their  living  successors  among  the  Neo- 
Chaldseans,  if  that  sect  should  arise,  to  express 
my  utter  disbelief  in  the  gods  of  Hasisadra. 
Hence,  it  follows,  that  I  find  Hasisadra's  account 
of  their  share  in  his  adventure  incredible  ;  and, 
as  the  physical  details  of  the  flood  are  inseparable 
from  its  theophanic  accompaniments,  and  are 
guaranteed  by  the  same  authority,  I  must  let 
them  go  with  the  rest.  The  consistency  of  such 
details  with  probability  counts  for  nothing.  The 
inhabitants  of  Chaldsea  must  always  have  been 
familiar  with  inundations  ;  probably  no  genera- 
tion failed  to  witness  an  inundation  which  rose 


2G0  hasisadka's  adventure  vn 

unusually  high,  or  was  rendered  serious  by  coin- 
cident atmospheric  or  other  disturbances.  And 
the  memory  of  the  general  features  of  any 
exceptionally  severe  and  devastating  flood,  would 
be  preserved  by  popular  tradition  for  long  ages. 
What,  then,  could  be  more  natural  than  that  a 
Chaldsean  poet  should  seek  for  the  incidents  of 
a  great  catastrophe  among  such  phenomena  ?  In 
what  other  way  than  by  such  an  appeal  to  their 
experience  could  he  so  surely  awaken  in  his 
audience  the  tragic  pity  and  terror?  What 
possible  ground  is  there  for  insisting  that  he 
must  have  had  some  individual  flood  in  view, 
and  that  his  history  is  historical,  in  the  sense 
that  the  account  of  the  effects  of  a  hurricane  in 
the  Bay  of  Bengal,  in  the  year  1875,  is 
historical  ? 

More  than  three  centuries  after  the  time  of 
Assurbanipal,  Berosus  of  Babylon,  born  in  the 
reign  of  Alexander  the  Great,  wrote  an  account 
of  the  history  of  his  country  in  Greek.  The 
work  of  Berosus  has  vanished  ;  but  extracts  from 
it — how  far  faithful  is  uncertain — have  been 
preserved  by  later  writers.  Among  these  occurs 
the  well-known  story  of  the  Deluge  of  Xisuthros, 
which  is  evidently  built  upon  the  same  foundation 
as  that  of  Hasisadra.  The  incidents  of  the  divine 
warning,  the  building  of  the  ship,  the  sending 
out  of  birds,  the  ascension  of  the  hero,   betray 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  261 

their  common  origin.  But  stories,  like  Madeira, 
acquire  a  heightened  flavour  with  time  and  travel ; 
and  the  version  of  Berosus  is  characterised  by 
those  circumstantial  improbabilities  which  habitu- 
ally gather  round  the  legend  of  a  legend.  The 
later  narrator  knows  the  exact  day  of  the  month 
on  which  the  flood  began.  The  dimensions  of 
the  ship  are  stated  with  Munchausenian  precision 
at  five  stadia  by  two — say,  half  by  one-fifth  of 
an  English  mile.  The  ship  runs  aground  among 
the  "  Gordsean  mountains  "  to  the  south  of  Lake 
Van,  in  Armenia,  beyond  the  limits  of  any 
imaginable  real  inundation  of  the  Euphrates 
valley  ;  and,  by  way  of  climax,  we  have  the 
assertion,  worthy  of  the  sailor  who  said  that  he 
had  brought  up  one  of  Pharaoh's  chariot  wheels 
on  the  fluke  of  his  anchor  in  the  Red  Sea,  that 
pilgrims  visited  the  locality  and  made  amulets  of 
the  bitumen  which  they  scraped  off  from  the 
still  extant  remains  of  the  mighty  ship  of 
Xisuthros. 

Suppose  that  some  later  polyhistor,  as  devoid 
of  critical  faculty  as  most  of  his  tribe,  had  found 
the  version  of  Berosus,  as  well  as  another  much 
nearer  the  original  story ;  that,  having  too  much 
respect  for  his  authorities  to  make  up  a  tertium 
quid  of  his  own,  out  of  the  materials  offered,  he 
followed  a  practice,  common  enough  among  an- 
cient and,  particularly,  among  Semitic  historians, 
of  dividing  both  into  fragments  and  piecing  these 


2G2  hasisadra's  adventure  th 

together,  without  troubling  himself  very  much 
about  the  resulting  repetitions  and  inconsistencies ; 
the  product  of  such  a  primitive  editorial  operation 
would  be  a  narrative  analogous  to  that  which 
treats  of  the  Noachian  deluge  in  the  book  of 
Genesis.  For  the  Pentateuchal  story  is  indu- 
bitably a  patchwork,  composed  of  fragments  of  at 
least  two,  different  and  partly  discrepant,  narra- 
tives, quilted  together  in  such  an  inartistic  fashion 
that  the  seams  remain  conspicuous.  And,  in  the 
matter  of  circumstantial  exaggeration,  it  in  some 
respects  excels  even  the  second-hand  legend 
of  Berosus. 

There  is  a  certain  practicality  about  the  notion 
of  taking  refuge  from  floods  and  storms  in  a  ship 
provided  with  a  steersman ;  but,  surely,  no 
one  w^ho  had  ever  seen  more  water  than  he 
could  wade  through  would  dream  of  facing  even 
a  moderate  breeze,  in  a  huge  three-storied  coffer, 
or  box,  three  hundred  cubits  long,  fifty  wide  and 
thirty  high,  left  to  drift  without  rudder  or  pilot.^ 
Not  content  with  giving  the  exact  year  of  Noah's 

1  In  the  second  volume  of  the  History  of  the  Euphrates 
Uxpedition,  p.  637,  Col.  Chesney  gives  a  very  interesting 
account  of  the  simple  and  rapid  manner  in  which  the  people 
about  Tekrit  and  in  the  marshes  of  Lemlnm  construct 
large  barges,  and  make  thera  water-tight  with  bitumen. 
Doubtless  t  he  practice  is  extremely  ancient  ;  and  as  Colonel 
Chesney  suggests,  may  possibly  have  furnished  the  conception 
of  Noah's  ark.  But  it  is  one  thing  to  build  a  barge  44ft.  long 
by  lift,  wide  and  4ft.  deep  in  the  way  described  ;  and  another 
to  get  a  vessel  of  ten  times  the  dimensions,  so  constructed,  to 
hold  together. 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  263 

asre  in  winch  the  flood  beo^an,  the  Pentateuchal 
story  adds  the  month  and  the  day  of  the  month. 
It  is  the  Deity  himself  who  "'  shuts  in "  Noah. 
The  modest  week  assigned  to  the  full  deluge 
in  Hasisadra's  story  becomes  forty  days,  in  one 
of  the  Pentateuchal  accounts,  and  a  hundred  and 
fifty  in  the  other.  The  flood,  which,  in  the 
version  of  Berosus,  has  grown  so  high  as  to  cast 
the  ship  among  the  mountains  of  Armenia,  is 
improved  upon  in  the  Hebrew  account  until  it 
covers  *'all  the  high  hills  that  were  under  the 
whole  heaven  " ;  and,  when  it  begins  to  subside, 
the  ark  is  left  stranded  on  the  summit  of  the 
highest  peak,  commonly  identified  with  Ararat 
itself. 

While  the  details  of  Hasisadra's  adventure  are, 
at  least,  compatible  with  the  physical  conditions 
of  the  Euphrates  valley,  and,  as  we  have  seen, 
involve  no  catastrophe  greater  than  such  as  might 
be  brought  under  those  conditions,  many  of  the 
very  precisely  stated  details  of  Noah's  flood 
contradict  some  of  the  best  established  results  of 
scientific  inquiry. 

If  it  is  certain  that  the  alluvium  of  the  Meso- 
potamian  plain  has  been  brought  down  by  the 
Tigris  and  the  Euphrates,  then  it  is  no  less 
certain  that  the  physical  structure  of  the  whole 
valley  has  persisted,  without  material  modifica- 
tion, for  many  thousand  years  before  the  date 
assigned  to  the  flood.     If  the  summits,  even  of 


264  hasisadra's  adventure  vii 

the  moderately  elevated  ridges  which  immediately 
bound  the  valley,  still  more  those  of  the  Kurdish 
and  Armenian  mountains,  were  ever  covered  by 
water,  for  even  forty  days,  that  water  must  have 
extended  over  the  whole  earth.  If  the  earth  was 
thus  covered,  anywhere  between  4000  and  5000 
years  ago,  or,  at  any  other  time,  since  the  higher 
terrestrial  animals  came  into  existence,  they  must 
have  been  destroyed  from  the  whole  face  of  it,  as 
the  Pentateuchal  account  declares  they  were  three 
several  times  (Genesis  vii.  21,  22,  23),  in  language 
which  cannot  be  made  more  emphatic,  or  more 
solemn,  than  it  is  ;  and  the  present  population 
must  consist  of  the  descendants  of  emigrants  from 
the  ark.  And,  if  that  is  the  case,  then,  as  has  often 
been  pointed  out,  the  sloths  of  the  Brazilian 
forests,  the  kangaroos  of  Australia,  the  great 
tortoises  of  the  Galapagos  islands,  must  have 
respectively  hobbled,  hopped,  and  crawled  over 
many  thousand  miles  of  land  and  sea  from 
"  Ararat "  to  their  present  habitations.  Thus,  the 
unquestionable  facts  of  the  geographical  distribu- 
tion of  recent  land  animals,  alone,  form  an 
insuperable  obstacle  to  the  acceptance  of  the 
assertion  that  the  kinds  of  animals  composing  the 
present  terrestrial  fauna  have  been,  at  any  time, 
universally  destroyed  in  the  way  described  in  the 
Pentateuch. 

It    is    upon    this    and    other    unimpeachable 
grounds,  that,  as  I  ventured  to  say  some  time  ago, 


VII  hasisadka's  adventure  265 

persons  who  are  duly  conversant  with  even  the 
elements  of  natural  science  decline  to  take  the 
Noachian  deluge  seriously  ;  and  that,  as  I  also 
pointed  out,  candid  theologians,  who,  without 
special  scientific  knowledge,  have  appreciated  the 
w^eight  of  scientific  arguments,  have  long  since 
given  it  up.  But,  as  Goethe  has  remarked,  there 
is  nothing  more  terrible  than  energetic  ignorance  ;  ^ 
and  there  are,  even  yet,  very  energetic  people, 
who  are  neither  candid,  nor  clear-headed,  nor 
theologians,  still  less  properly  instructed  in  the 
elements  of  natural  science,  who  make  prodigious 
efforts  to  obscure  the  effect  of  these  plain  truths, 
and  to  conceal  their  real  surrender  of  the  his- 
torical character  of  Noah's  deluge  under  cover  of 
the  smoke  of  a  great  discharge  of  pseudoscientific 
artillery.  They  seem  to  imagine  that  the  proofs 
which  abound  in  all  parts  of  the  world,  of  large 
oscillations  of  the  relative  level  of  land  and  sea, 
combined  with  the  probability  that,  when  the 
sea-level  was  rising,  sudden  incursions  of  the  sea 
like  that  which  broke  in  over  Holland  and  formed 
the  Zuyder  Zee,  may  have  often  occurred,  can  be 
made  to  look  like  evidence  that  something  that, 
by  courtesy,  might  be  called  a  general  Deluge  has 
really  taken  place.  Their  discursive  energy  drags 
misunderstood  truth  into  their  service  ;  and  "  the 
glacial  epoch  "  is  as  sure  to  crop  up  among  them 

^  "Es  ist  nichts  schrecklicher  als  eine  thatige  Unwissenheit. " 
Maximen  und  Refiexioncn,  iii. 


266  hasisadra's  adventure  vh 

as  King:  Charles's  head  in  a  famous  memorial — 
with  about  as  much  appropriateness  The  old 
story  of  the  raised  beach  on  Moel  Tryfaen  is 
trotted  out ;  though,  even  if  the  facts  are  as  yet 
rightly  interpreted,  there  is  not  a  shadow  of 
evidence  that  the  change  of  sea-level  in  that 
locality  was  sudden,  or  that  glacial  Welshmen 
would  have  known  it  was  taking  place.^  Surely 
it  is  difficult  to  perceive  the  relevancy  of  bringing 
in  something  that  happened  in  the  glacial  epoch 
(if  it  did  happen)  to  account  for  the  tradition  of  a 
flood  in  the  Euphrates  valley  between  2000  and 
3000  B.C.  But  the  date  of  the  Noachian  flood  is 
solidly  fixed  by  the  sole  authority  for  it ;  no 
shuffling  of  the  chronological  data  will  carry  it  so 
far  back  as  3000  B.C.  ;  and  the  Hebrew  epos 
agrees  with  the  Chaldsean  in  placing  it  after  the 
development  of  a  somewhat  advanced  civilisation. 
The  only  authority  for  the  Noachian  deluge 
assures  us  that,  before  it  visited  the  earth,  Cain 
had  built  cities;  Jubal  had  invented  harps  and 
organs ;  while  mankind  had  advanced  so  far 
beyond  the  neolithic,  nay  even  the  bronze,  stage 
that  Tubal-cain  was  a  worker  in  iron.  Therefore, 
if  the  Noachian  legend  is  to  be  taken  for  the 
history  of  an  event  which  happened  in  the  glacial 
epoch,  we  must  revise  our  notions  of  pleistocene 

^  The  well-known  difificulties  connected  with  this  case  have 
recently  been  carefully  discussed  by  Mr.  Bell  in  the  Transactions 
of  the  Geological  Society  of  Glasgow. 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  267 

civilisation.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  Penta- 
teuchal  story  only  means  something  quite 
different,  that  happened  somewhere  else,  thou- 
sands of  years  earlier,  dressed  up,  what  becomes 
of  its  credit  as  history  ?  I  wonder  what  would  be 
said  to  a  modem  historian  who  asserted  that 
Pekin  was  burnt  down  in  1886,  and  then  tried  to 
justify  the  assertion  by  adducing  evidence  of  the 
Great  Fire  of  London  in  1666.  Yet  the  attempt 
to  save  the  credit  of  the  Noachian  story  by  refer- 
ence to  something  which  is  supposed  to  have 
happened  in  the  far  north,  in  the  glacial  epoch,  is 
far  more  preposterous. 

Moreover,  these  dust-raising  dialecticians  ignore 
some  of  the  most  important  and  well-known  facts 
which  bear  upon  the  question.  Anything  more 
than  a  parochial  acquaintance  with  physical 
geography  and  geology  would  suffice  to  remind  its 
possessor  that  the  Holy  Land  itself  offers  a  stand- 
ing protest  against  bringing  such  a  deluge  as  that 
of  Noah  anywhere  near  it,  either  in  historical 
times  or  in  the  course  of  that  pleistocene  period, 
of  which  the  "  great  ice  age  "  formed  a  part. 

Judaea  and  Galilee,  Moab  and  Gilead,  occupy 
part  of  that  extensive  tableland  at  the  summit  of 
the  western  boundary  of  the  Euphrates  valley,  to 
which  I  have  already  referred.  If  that  valley 
had  ever  been  filled  with  water  to  a  height 
sufficient,  not  indeed  to  cover  a  third  of  Ararat,  in 
the  north,  or  half  of  some  of  the  mountains  of  the 


268  HASISADRAS  ADVENTURE  vii 

Persian  frontier  in  the  east,  but  to  reach  even 
four  or  five  thousand  feet,  it  must  have  stood  over 
the  Palestinian  hog's  back,  and  have  filled,  up  to 
the  brim,  every  depression  on  its  surface.  There- 
fore it  could  not  have  failed  to  fill  that  remarkable 
trench  in  v^hich  the  Dead  Sea,  the  Jordan,  and 
the  Sea  of  Galilee  lie,  and  which  is  known  as  the 
"  Jordan- Arabah  "  valley. 

This  long  and  deep  hollow  extends  more  than 
200  miles,  from  near  the  site  of  ancient  Dan  in 
the  north,  to  the  water-parting  at  the  head  of  the 
Wady  Arabah  in  the  south ;  and  its  deepest  part, 
at  the  bottom  of  the  basin  of  the  Dead  Sea,  lies 
2500  feet  below  the  surface  of  the  adjacent 
Mediterranean.  The  lowest  portion  of  the  rim  of 
the  Jordan- Arabah  valley  is  situated  at  the  village 
of  El  Fuleh,  257  feet  above  the  Mediterranean. 
Everywhere  else  the  circumjacent  heights  rise  to 
a  very  much  greater  altitude.  Hence,  of  the 
water  which  stood  over  the  Syrian  tableland,  when 
as  much  drained  off  as  could  run  away,  enough 
would  remain  to  form  a  "  Mere  "  without  an  out- 
let, 2757  feet  deep,  over  the  present  site  of  the 
Dead  Sea.  From  this  time  forth,  the  level  of  the 
Palestinian  mere  could  be  lowered  only  by  evap- 
oration. It  is  an  extremely  interesting  fact, 
which  has  happily  escaped  capture  for  the  pur- 
poses of  the  energetic  misunderstanding,  that  the 
valley,  at  one  time,  was  filled,  certainly  within 
150  feet  of  this  height — probably  higher.     And  it 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  269 

IS  almost  equally  certain,  that  the  time  at  which 
this  great  Jordan-Arabah  mere  reached  its 
highest  level  coincides  with  the  glacial  epoch. 
But  then  the  evidence  which  goes  to  prove  this, 
also  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  this  state  of  thing-s 
obtained  at  a  period  considerably  older  than 
even  4000  B.C.,  when  the  world,  according  to  the 
"  Helps  "  (or  shall  we  say  "  Hindrances  ")  provided 
for  the  simple  student  of  the  Bible,  was  created  ; 
that  it  was  not  brought  about  by  any  diluvial 
catastrophe,  but  was  the  result  of  a  change  in  the 
relative  activities  of  certain  natural  operations 
which  are  quietly  going  on  now  ;  and  that,  since 
the  level  of  the  mere  began  to  sink,  many  thousand 
years  ago,  no  serious  catastrophe  of  any  descrip- 
tion has  affected  the  valley. 

The  evidence  that  the  Jordan-Arabah  valley 
really  was  once  filled  with  water,  the  surface  of 
which  reached  w^ithin  160  feet  of  the  level  of  the 
pass  of  Jezrael,  and  possibly  stood  higher,  is  this : 
Remains  of  alluvial  strata,  containing  shells  of 
the  freshwater  moUusks  which  still  inhabit  the 
valley,  worn  down  into  terraces  by  waves  which 
long  rippled  at  the  same  level,  and  furrowed  by 
the  channels  excavated  by  modern  rainfalls,  have 
been  found  at  the  former  height ;  and  they  are 
repeated,  at  intervals,  lower  down,  until  the  Ghor, 
or  plain  of  the  Jordan,  itself  an  alluvial  deposit, 
is  reached.  These  strata  attain  a  considerable 
thickness ;  and  they  indicate  that   the  epoch  at 


270  hasisadra's  adventure  vh 

which  the  freshwater  mere  of  Palestine  reached 
its  highest  level  is  extremely  remote;  that  its 
diminution  has  taken  place  very  slowly,  and  with 
periods  of  rest,  during  which  the  first  formed 
deposits  were  cut  down  into  terraces.  This  con- 
clusion is  strikingly  borne  out  by  other  facts.  A 
volcanic  region  stretches  from  Galilee  to  Gilead 
and  the  Hauran,  on  each  side  of  the  northern  end 
of  the  valley.  Some  of  the  streams  of  basaltic 
lava  which  have  been  thrown  out  from  its  craters 
and  clefts  in  times  of  which  history  has  no  record, 
have  run  athwart  the  course  of  the  Jordan  itself, 
or  of  that  of  some  of  its  tributary  streams.  The 
lava  streams,  therefore,  must  be  of  later  date  than 
the  depressions  they  fill.  And  yet,  where  they 
have  thus  temporarily  dammed  the  Jordan  and 
the  Jermuk,  these  streams  have  had  time  to  cut 
through  the  hard  basalts  and  lay  bare  the  beds, 
over  which,  before  the  lava  streams  invaded  them, 
they  flowed. 

In  fact,  the  antiquity  of  the  present  Jordan- 
Arabah  valley,  as  a  hollow  in  a  tableland,  out  of 
reach  of  the  sea,  and  troubled  by  no  diluvial  or 
other  disturbances,  beyond  the  volcanic  eruptions 
of  Gilead  and  of  Galilee,  is  vast,  even  as  estimated 
by  a  geological  standard.  No  marine  deposits 
of  later  than  miocene  age  occur  in  or  about  it; 
and  there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  Syro- 
Arabian  plateau  has  been  dry  land,  throughout 
the  pliocene  and  later  epochs,  down  to  the  present 


vn  hasisadra's  adventure  271 

time.  Raised  beaches,  containing  recent  shells, 
on  the  Levantine  shores  of  the  Mediterranean  and 
on  those  of  the  Red  Sea,  testify  to  a  geologically 
recent  change  of  the  sea  level  to  the  extent  of  250 
or  300  feet,  probably  produced  by  the  slow  eleva- 
tion of  the  land  ;  and,  as  I  have  already  remarked, 
the  alluvial  plain  of  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris 
appears  to  have  been  affected  in  the  same  way, 
though  seemingly  to  a  less  extent.  But  of  violent, 
or  catastrophic,  change  there  is  no  trace.  Even 
the  volcanic  outbursts  have  flowed  in  even  sheets 
over  the  old  land  surface;  and  the  long  lines 
of  the  horizontal  terraces  which  remain,  testify 
to  the  geological  insignificance  of  such  earthquakes 
as  have  taken  place.  It  is,  indeed,  possible  that  the 
original  formation  of  the  valley  may  have  been  de- 
termined by  the  well-known  fault,  along  which  the 
western  rocks  are  relatively  depressed  and  the  east- 
ern elevated.  But,  whether  that  fault  was  effected 
slowly  or  quickly,  and  whenever  it  came  into  ex- 
istence, the  excavation  of  the  valley  to  its  present 
width,  no  less  than  the  sculpturing  of  its  steep 
walls  and  of  the  innumerable  deep  ravines  which 
score  them  down  to  the  very  bottom,  are  indubit- 
ably due  to  the  operation  of  rain  and  streams, 
during  an  enormous  length  of  time,  without 
interruption  or  disturbance  of  any  magnitude. 
The  alluvial  deposits  which  have  been  mentioned 
are  continued  into  the  lateral  ravines,  and  have 
more  or  less  filled  them.     But,  since  the  waters 


272 


vir 


have  been  lowered,  these  deposits  have  been  cut 
down  to  great  depths,  and  are  still  being  excavated 
by  the  present  temporary,  or  permanent,  streams. 
Hence,  it  follows,  that  all  these  ravines  must 
have  existed  before  the  time  at  which  the  valley 
was  occupied  by  the  great  mere.  This  fact  acquires 
a  peculiar  importance  when  we  proceed  to  con- 
sider the  grounds  for  the  conclusion  that  the  old 
Palestinian  mere  attained  its  highest  level  in  the 
cold  period  of  the  pleistocene  epoch.  It  is  well 
known  that  glaciers  formerly  came  low  down  on 
the  flanks  of  Lebanon  and  Antilebanon ;  indeed, 
the  old  moraines  are  the  haunts  of  the  few  survivors 
of  the  famous  cedars.  This  implies  a  perennial 
snowcap  of  great  extent  on  Hermon  ;  therefore,  a 
vastly  greater  supply  of  water  to  the  sources  of 
the  Jordan  which  rise  on  its  flanks ;  and,  in 
addition,  such  a  total  change  in  the  general  climate, 
that  the  innumerable  Wadys,  now  traversed  only 
by  occasional  storm  torrents,  must  have  been 
occupied  by  ])erennial  streams.  All  this  involves 
a  lower  annual  temperature  and  a  moist  and  rainy 
atmosphere.  If  such  a  change  of  meteorological 
conditions  could  be  effected  now,  when  the  loss  by 
evaporation  from  the  surface  of  the  Dead  Sea 
salt-pan  balances  all  the  gain  from  the  Jordan 
and  other  streams,  the  scale  would  be  turned  in 
the  other  direction.  The  waters  of  the  Dead  Sea 
would  become  diluted;  its  level  would  rise;  it 
would  cover,  first  the  plain  of  the  Jordan,  then  the 


vn  HASISADRA*S   ADVENTURE  273 

lake  of  Galilee,  then  the  middle  Jordan  between 
this  lake  and  that  of  Hiileh  (the  ancient  Merom) ; 
and,  finally,  it  would  encroach,  northwards,  along 
the  course  of  the  upper  Jordan,  and,  southwards, 
up  the  Wady  Arabah,  until  it  reached  some  260 
feet  above  the  level  of  the  Mediterranean,  when 
it  would  attain  a  permanent  level,  by  sending  any 
superflaity  through  the  pass  of  Jezrael  to  swell 
the  waters  of  the  Kishon,  and  flow  thence  into 
the  Mediterranean. 

Reverse  the  process,  in  consequence  of  the  excess 
of  loss  by  evaporation  over  gain  by  inflow,  which 
must  have  set  in  as  the  climate  of  Syria  changed 
after  the  end  of  the  pleistocene  epoch,  and  (without 
taking  into  consideration  any  other  circumstances) 
the  present  state  of  things  must  eventually  be 
reached — a  concentrated  saline  solution  in  the 
deepest  part  of  the  valley — water,  rather  more 
charged  with  saline  matter  than  ordinary  fresh 
water,  in  the  lower  Jordan  and  the  lake  of  Galilee 
— fresh  waters,  still  largely  derived  from  the  snows 
of  Hermon,  in  the  upper  Jordan  and  in  Lake  Huleh. 
But,  if  the  full  state  of  the  Jordan  valley  marks  the 
glacial  epoch,  then  it  follows  that  the  excavation 
of  that  valley  by  atmospheric  agencies  must  have 
occupied  an  immense  antecedent  time — a  large  part, 
perhaps  the  whole,  of  the  pliocene  epoch ;  and  we 
are  thus  forced  to  the  conclusion  that,  since  the 
miocene  epoch,  the  physical  conformation  of  the 
Holy  Land  has  been  substantially  what  it  is  now. 
lOY 


274  hasisadra's  adventure  vii 

It  has  beeu  more  or  less  rained  upon,  searched  by 
earthquakes  here  and  there,  partially  overflowed  by 
lava  streams,  slowly  raised  (relatively  to  the  sea- 
level)  a  few  hundred  feet.  But  there  is  not  a  shadow 
of  ground  for  supposing  that,  throughout  all  this 
time,  terrestrial  animals  have  ceased  to  inhabit  a 
large  part  of  its  surface ;  or  that,  in  many  parts, 
they  have  been,  in  any  respect,  incommoded  by 
the  changes  which  have  taken  place. 

The  evidence  of  the  general  stability  of  the 
physical  conditions  of  Western  Asia,  which  is 
furnished  by  Palestine  and  by  the  Euphrates 
Valley,  is  only  fortified  if  we  extend  our  view 
northwards  to  the  Black  Sea  and  the  Caspian. 
The  Caspian  is  a  sort  of  magnified  replica  of  the 
Dead  Sea.  The  bottom  of  the  deepest  part  of 
this  vast  inland  mere  is  about  3000  feet  below  the 
level  of  the  Mediterranean,  while  its  surface  is  lower 
by  85  feet.  At  present,  it  is  separated,  on  the 
west,  by  wide  spaces  of  dry  land  from  the  Black 
Sea,  which  has  the  same  height  as  the  Mediter- 
ranean ;  and,  on  the  east,  from  the  Aral,  188  feet 
above  that  level.  The  waters  of  the  Black  Sea, 
now  in  communication  with  the  Mediterranean  by 
the  Dardanelles  and  the  Bosphorus,  are  salt,  but 
become  brackish  northwards,  where  tlie  rivers  of 
the  steppes  pour  in  a  great  volume  of  fresh 
water.  Those  of  the  shallower  northern  half  of 
the  Caspian  are  similarly  affected  by  the  Volga 
and  the  Ural,  while,  in  the  shallow  bays  of  the 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  275 

southern  division,  they  become  extremely  saline 
in  consequence  of  the  intense  evaporation.  The 
Aral  Sea,  though  supplied  by  the  Jaxartes  and 
the  Oxus,  has  brackish  water.  There  is  evidence 
that,  in  the  pliocene  and  pleistocene  periods,  to  go 
no  farther  back,  the  strait  of  the  Dardanelles  did 
not  exist,  and  that  the  vast  area,  from  the  valley 
of  the  Danube  to  that  of  the  Jaxartes,  was 
covered  by  brackish  or,  in  some  parts,  fresh  water 
to  a  height  of  at  least  200  feet  above  the  level 
of  the  Mediterranean.  At  the  present  time,  the 
water-parting  which  separates  the  northern  part 
of  the  basin  of  the  Caspian  from  the  vast  plains 
traversed  by  the  Tobol  and  the  Obi,  in  their 
course  to  the  Arctic  Ocean,  appears  to  be  less  than 
200  feet  above  the  latter.  It  would  seem,  there- 
fore, to  be  very  probable  that,  under  the  climatal 
conditions  of  part  of  the  pleistocene  period,  the 
valley  of  the  Obi  played  the  same  part  in  relation 
to  the  Ponto-Aralian  sea,  as  that  of  the  Kishon 
may  have  done  to  the  great  mere  of  the  Jordan 
valley  ;  and  that  the  outflow  formed  the  channel 
by  which  the  well-known  Arctic  elements  of  the 
fauna  of  the  Caspian  entered  it.  For  the  fossil 
remains  imbedded  in  the  strata  continuously 
deposited  in  the  Aralo-Caspian  area,  since  the 
latter  end  of  the  miocene  epoch,  show  no  sign 
that,  from  that  time  onward,  it  has  ever  been 
covered  by  sea  water.  Therefore,  the  supposition 
of  a  free  inflow  of  the  Arctic  Ocean,  which  at  one 


276  hasisadra's  adventure  vii 

time  was  generally  received,  as  well  as  that  of 
various  hypothetical  deluges  from  that  quarter, 
must  be  seriously  questioned. 

The  Caspian  and  the  Aral  stand  in  somewhat 
the  same  relation  to  the  vast  basin  of  dry  land  in 
which  they  lie,  as  the  Dead  Sea  and  the  lake  of 
Galilee  to  the  Jordan  valley.  They  are  the 
remains  of  a  vast,  mostly  brackish,  mere,  which 
has  dried  up  in  consequence  of  the  excess  of 
evaporation  over  supply,  since  the  cold  and  damp 
climate  of  the  pleistocene  epoch  gave  place  to  the 
increasing  dryness  and  great  summer  heats  of 
Central  Asia  in  more  modern  times.  The 
desiccation  of  the  Aralo-Caspian  basin,  which 
communicated  with  the  Black  Sea  only  by  a  com- 
paratively narrow  and  shallow  strait  along  the 
present  valley  of  Manytsch,  the  bottom  of  which 
was  less  than  100  feet  above  the  Mediterranean, 
must  have  been  vastly  aided  by  the  erosion  of  the 
strait  of  the  Dardanelles  towards  the  end  of  the 
pleistocene  epoch,  or  perhaps  later.  For  the 
result  of  thus  opening  a  passage  for  the  waters  of 
the  Black  Sea  into  the  Mediterranean  must  have 
been  the  gradual  lowering  of  its  level  to  that  of 
the  latter  sea.  When  this  process  had  gone  so 
far  as  to  bring  down  the  Black  Sea  water  to 
within  less  than  a  hundred  feet  of  its  present 
level,  the  strait  of  Manytsch  ceased  to  exist ;  and 
the  vast  body  of  fresh  water  brought  down  by  the 
Danube,  the  Dnieper,  the  Don,  and  other  South 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  277 

Russian  rivers  was  cut  off  from  the  Caspian,  and 
eventually  delivered  into  the  Mediterranean. 
Thus,  there  is  as  conclusive  evidence  as  one  can 
well  hope  to  obtain  in  these  matters,  that,  north 
of  the  Euphrates  valley,  the  physical  geography 
of  an  area  as  large  as  all  Central  Europe  has 
remained  essentially  unchanged,  from  the  miocene 
period  down  to  our  time ;  just  as,  to  the  west  of 
the  Euphrates  valley,  Palestine  has  exhibited  a 
similar  persistence  of  geographical  type.  To  the 
south,  the  valley  of  the  Nile  tells  exactly  the 
same  story.  The  holes  bored  by  miocene 
mollusks  in  the  cliffs  east  and  west  of  Cairo  bear 
witness  that,  in  the  miocene  epoch,  it  contained 
an  arm  of  the  sea,  the  bottom  of  which  has  since 
been  gradually  filled  up  by  the  alluvium  of  the 
Nile,  and  elevated  to  its  present  position.  But 
the  higher  parts  of  the  Mokattam  and  of  the 
desert  about  Ghizeh,  have  been  dry  land  from 
that  time  to  this.  Too  little  is  known  of  the 
geology  of  Persia,  at  present,  to  allow  any  positive 
conclusion  to  be  enunciated.  But,  taking  the 
name  to  indicate  the  whole  continental  mass  of 
Iran,  between  the  valleys  of  the  Indus  and  the 
Euphrates,  the  supposition  that  its  physical  geo- 
graphy has  remained  unchanged  for  an  immensely 
long  period  is  hardly  rash.  The  country  is,  in 
fact,  an  enormous  basin,  surrounded  on  all  sides 
by  a  mountainous  rim,  and  subdivided  within  by 
ridges  into  plateaus  and  hollows,  the   bottom  of 


278  hasisadra's  adventure  vh 

the  deepest  of  which,  in  the  province  of  Seistan, 
probably  descends  to  the  level  of  the  Indian 
Ocean.  These  depressions  are  occupied  by  salt 
marshes  and  deserts,  in  which  the  waters  of  the 
streams  which  flow  down  the  sides  of  the  basin 
are  now  dissipated  by  evaporation.  I  am  ac- 
quainted with  no  evidence  that  the  present 
Iranian  basin  was  ever  occupied  by  the  sea ;  but 
the  accumulations  of  gravel  over  a  great  extent 
of  its  surface  indicate  long-continued  water  action. 
It  is,  therefore,  a  fair  presumption  that  large  lakes 
have  covered  much  of  its  present  deserts,  and  that 
they  have  dried  up  by  the  operation  of  the  same 
changed  climatal  conditions  as  those  which  have 
reduced  the  Caspian  and  the  Dead  Sea  to  their 
present  dimensions.^ 

Thus  it  would  seem  that  the  Euphrates  valley, 
the  centre  of  the  fabled  Noachian  deluge,  is  also 
the  centre  of  a  region  covering  some  millions  of 
square  miles  of  the  present  continents  of  Europe, 
Asia,  and  Africa,  in  which  all  the  facts,  relevant 
to  the  argument,  at  present  known,  converge  to 
the  conclusion  that,  since  the  miocene  epoch,  the 
essential  features  of  its  physical  geography  have 
remained  unchanged;  that  it  has  neither  been 
depressed  below  the  sea,  nor  swept  by  diluvial 


1  An  instructive  parallel  is  exhibited  by  the  **  Great  Basin  " 
of  North  America.  See  the  remarkable  memoir  on  Lake 
Bowmville  by  Mi".  G.  K.  Gilbert,  of  the  United  States 
Geological  Survey,  just  published. 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  279 

waters  since  that  time ;  and  that  the  Clialdean 
version  of  the  legend  of  a  flood  in  the  Euphrates 
valley  is,  of  all  those  which  are  extant,  the  only- 
one  which  is  even  consistent  with  probability, 
since  it  depicts  a  local  inundation,  not  more  severe 
than  one  which  might  be  brought  about  by  a 
concurrence  of  favourable  conditions  at  the 
present  day  ;  and  which  might  probably  have  been 
more  easily  effected  when  the  Persian  Gulf 
extended  farther  north.  Hence,  the  recourse  to 
the  "  glacial  epoch  "  for  some  event  which  might 
colourably  represent  a  flood,  distinctly  asserted 
by  the  only  authority  for  it  to  have  occurred  in 
historical  times,  is  peculiarly  unfortunate.  Even 
a  Welsh  antiquary  might  hesitate  over  the 
supposition  that  a  tradition  of  the  fate  of  Moel 
Tryfaen,  in  the  glacial  epoch,  had  furnished  the 
basis  of  fact  for  a  legend  which  arose  among 
people  whose  own  experience  abundantly  supplied 
them  with  the  needful  precedents.  Moreover,  if 
evidence  of  interchanges  of  land  and  sea  are  to  be 
accepted  as  "  confirmations "  of  Noah's  deluge, 
there  are  plenty  of  sources  for  the  tradition  to 
be  had  much  nearer  than  Wales. 

The  depression  now  filled  by  the  Eed  Sea,  for 
example,  appears  to  be,  geologically,  of  very 
recent  origin.  The  later  deposits  found  on  its 
shores,  two  or  three  hundred  feet  above  the  sea 
level,  contain  no  remains  older  than  those  of  the 
present  fauna  ;  while,  as  I  have  already  mentioned, 


280  hasisadra's  adventure  th 

the  valley  of  the  adjacent  delta  of  the  Nile  was  a 
gulf  of  the  sea  in  miocene  times.     But  there  is 

o 

not  a  particle  of  evidence  that  the  change  of 
relative  level  which  admitted  the  waters  of  the 
Indian  Ocean  between  Arabia  and  Africa,  took 
place  any  faster  than  that  which  is  now  going  on 
in  Greenland  and  Scandinavia,  and  which  has  left 
their  inhabitants  undisturbed.  Even  more  re- 
markable changes  were  effected,  towards  the  end 
of,  or  since,  the  glacial  epoch,  over  the  region  now 
occupied  by  the  Levantine  Mediterranean  and  the 
^gean  Sea.  The  eastern  coast  region  of  Asia 
Minor,  the  western  of  Greece,  and  many  of  the 
intermediate  islands,  exhibit  thick  masses  of 
stratified  deposits  of  later  tertiary  age  and  of 
purely  lacustrine  characters  ;  and  it  is  remarkable 
that,  on  the  south  side  of  the  island  of  Crete, 
such  masses  present  steep  cliifs  facing  the  sea,  so 
that  the  southern  boundary  of  the  lake  in  which 
they  were  formed  must  have  been  situated  where 
the  sea  now  flows.  Indeed,  there  are  valid 
reasons  for  the  supposition  that  the  dry  land  once 
extended  far  to  the  west  of  the  present  Levantine 
coast,  and  not  improbably  forced  the  Nile  to  seek 
an  outlet  to  the  north-east  of  its  present  delta — a 
possibility  of  no  small  importance  in  relation  to 
certain  puzzling  facts  in  the  geographical  distri- 
bution of  animals  in  this  region.  At  any  rate, 
continuous  land  joined  Asia  Minor  with  the 
Balkan  peninsula ;  and  its  surface  bore  deep  fresh- 


VII  hasisadra's  adventure  281 

water  lakes,  apparently  disconnected  with  the 
Ponto-Aralian  sea.  This  state  of  thin^js  lasted 
long  enough  to  allow  of  the  formation  of  the 
thick  lacustrine  strata  to  which  I  have  referred. 
I  am  not  aware  that  there  is  the  smallest  ground 
for  the  assumption  that  the  ^gean  land  was 
broken  up  in  consequence  of  any  of  the  "  catas- 
trophes "  which  are  so  commonly  invoked.^  For 
anything  that  appears  to  the  contrary,  the  narrow, 
steep-sided,  straits  between  the  islands  of  the 
Mgean  archipelago  may  have  been  originally 
brought  about  by  ordinary  atmospheric  and  stream 
action ;  and  may  then  have  been  filled  from  the 
Mediterranean,  during  a  slow  submergence  proceed- 
ing from  the  south  northwards.  The  strait  of  the 
Dardanelles  is  bounded  by  undisturbed  pleisto- 
cene strata  forty  feet  thick,  through  which,  to  all 
appearance,  the  present  passage  has  been  quietly 
cut. 

That  Olympus  and  Ossa  were  torn  asunder 
and  the  waters  of  the  Thessalian  basin  poured 
forth,  is  a  very  ancient  notion,  and  an  often  cited 
"  confirmation  "  of  Deucalion's  flood.  It  has  not 
yet  ceased  to  be  in  vogue,  apparently  because 
those  who  entertain  it  are  not  aware  that  modern 
geological  investigation  has  conclusively  proved 
that   the  gorge  of  the   Peneus  is  as  typical  an 

^  It  is  trae  that  earth»^nakes  are  common  enough,  but  they 
are  incompetent  to  produce  such  changes  as  those  which  have 
taken  place. 


282  hasisadra's  adventure  vn 

example  of  a  valley  of  erosion  as  any  to  be  seen 
in  Auvergne  or  in  Colorado.^ 

Thus,  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  the  vast 
expanse  of  country  which  can  be  proved  to  have 
been  untouched  by  any  catastrophe  before,  during, 
and  since  the  "glacial  epoch,"  lie  the  great  areas 
of  the  ^gean  and  the  Bed  Sea,  in  which,  during 
or  since  the  glacial  epoch,  changes  of  the  relative 
positions  of  land  and  sea  have  taken  place,  in 
comparison  with  which  the  submergence  of  Moel 
Tryfaen,  with  all  Wales  and  Scotland  to  boot, 
does  not  come  to  much. 

What,  then,  is  the  relevancy  of  talk  about  the 
"  glacial  epoch  "  to  the  question  of  the  historical 
veracity  of  the  narrator  of  the  story  of  the 
Noachian  deluge  ?  So  far  as  my  knowledge  goes, 
there  is  not  a  particle  of  evidence  that  destructive 
inundations  were  .more  common,  over  the  general 
surface  of  the  earth,  in  the  glacial  epoch  than 
they  have  been  before  or  since.  No  doubt  the 
fringe  of  an  ice-covered  region  must  be  always 
liable  to  them  ;  but,  if  we  examine  the  records 
of  such  catastrophes  in  historical  times,  those 
produced  in  the  deltas  of  great  rivers,  or  in 
lowlands  like  Holland,  by  sudden  floods,  combined 
with  gales  of  wind  or  with  unusual  tides,  far  excel 
all  others. 

^See  Teller,  Gcoloqische  Beschrcihung  des  sud-ostUrhcn 
Thefisalicn :  Dcnkschriften  d.  Akademie  der  Wissenschaften, 
Wien,  Bd.  xl.  p.  199. 


vn  hasisadra's  adventure  283 

With  respect  to  such  inundations  as  are  the 
consequences  of  earthquakes,  and  other  slight 
movements  of  the  crust  of  the  earth,  I  have 
never  heard  of  anything  to  show  that  they  were 
more  frequent  and  severer  in  the  quaternary  or 
tertiary  epochs  than  they  are  now.  In  the 
discussion  of  these,  as  of  all  other  geological 
problems,  the  appeal  to  needless  catastrophes  is 
born  of  that  impatience  of  the  slow  and  painful 
search  after  sufficient  causes,  in  the  ordinary 
course  of  nature,  which  is  a  temptation  to 
all,  though  only  energetic  ignorance  nowadays 
completely  succumbs  to  it. 

POSTSCRIPT. 
My  best  thanks  are  due  to  Mr.  Gladstone  for  his  courteous 
withdrawal  of  one  of  the  statements  to  which  I  have  thought  it 
needful  to  take  exception.  The  familiarity  with  controversy, 
to  which  Mr.  Gladstone  alludes,  will  have  accustomed  him  to 
the  misadventures  which  arise  when,  as  sometimes  will  happen 
in  the  hea,t  of  fence,  the  buttons  come  off  the  foils.  I  trust  that 
any  scratch  which  he  may  have  received  will  heal  as  quickly  as 
my  own  flesh  wounds  have  done. 

A  contribution  to  the  last  number  of  this  Review  ( The  Nine- 
teenth Century)  of  a  different  order  would  be  left  unnoticed,  were 
it  not  that  my  silence  would  convert  me  into  an  accessory  to 
misrepresentations  of  a  very  grave  character.  However,  I  shall 
restrict  myself  to  the  barest  possible  statement  of  facts,  leaving 
my  readers  to  draw  their  own  conclusions. 

In  an  article  entitled  '*A  Great  Lesson,"  published  in  this 
Review  for  September,   1887  : 

(1)  The  Duke  of  Argyll  says  the  "overthrow  of  Darwin's 
speculations  "  (p.  301)  concerning  the  origin  of  coral  reefs,  whi'.-h 


284  HASISADRA's    adventure  VII 

he  fancied  had  taken  place,  had  been  received  by  men  of  science 
"  with  a  grudging  silence  as  far  as  public  discussion  is  concerned  " 
p.  301). 

The  truth  is  that,  as  every  one  acquainted  with  the  literature 
of  the  subject  was  well  aware,  the  views  supposed  to  have 
effected  this  overthrow  had  been  fully  and  publicly  discussed  by 
Dana  in  the  United  States  ;  by  Geikie,  Green,  and  Prestwich 
in  this  country  ;  by  Lapparent  in  France ;  and  by  Credner  in 
Germany. 

(2)  The  Duke  of  Argyll  says  '*  that  no  serious  reply  has  ever 
been  attempted  "  (p.  305). 

The  truth  is  that  the  highest  living  authority  on  the  subject, 
Professor  Dana,  published  a  most  weighty  reply,  two  years 
before  the  Duke  of  Argyll  committed  himself  to  this  statement. 

(3)  The  Duke  of  Argyll  uses  the  preceding  products  of  de- 
fective knowledge,  multiplied  by  excessive  imagination,  to 
illustrate  the  manner  in  w^hich  "certain  accepted  opinions" 
established  * '  a  sort  of  Reign  of  Terror  in  their  own  behalf " 
(p.  307). 

The  truth  is  that  no  plea,  except  that  of  total  ignorance  of 
the  literature  of  the  subject,  can  excuse  the  errors  cited,  and 
that  the  "  Reign  of  Terror  "  is  a  purely  subjective  phenomenon. 

(4)  The  letter  in  "  Nature  "  for  the  l7th  of  November,  1887,  to 
which  I  am  referred,  contains  neither  substantiation,  nor 
retractation,  of  statements  1  and  2.  Nevertheless,  it  repeats 
number  3.  The  Duke  of  Argyll  says  of  his  article  that  it  "  has 
done  what  I  intended  it  to  do.  It  has  called  wide  attention  to 
the  influence  of  mere  authority  in  establishing  erroneous  theories 
and  in  retarding  the  progress  of  scientific  truth." 

(5)  The  Duke  of  Argyll  illustrates  the  influence  of  his 
fictitious  "  Reign  of  Terror  "  by  the  statement  that  Mr.  John 
Murray  "was  strongly  advised  against  the  publication  of  his 
views  in  derogation  of  Darwin's  long-accepted  theoiy  of  the 
coral  islands,  and  was  actually  induced  to  delay  it  for  two 
years  "  (p.  307).  And  in  "Nature"  for  the  17th  November,  1887, 
the  Duke  of  Argyll  states  that  he  has  seen  a  letter  from  Sir 
Wyville  Thomson  in  which  he  "urged  and  almost  insisted  that 
Mr.  Mnn-ay  should  withdraw  the  reading  of  his  papers  on  the 


711  hasisadra's  adventure  285 

subject  from  the  Royal  Society  of  Edinburgh.  This  was  in 
February,  1877."  The  next  paragraph,  however,  contains  the 
confession:  "No  special  reason  was  assigned."  The  Duke  of 
Argyll  proceeds  to  give  a  speculative  opinion  that  "Sir  Wyville 
dreaded  some  injury  to  the  scientific  reputation  of  the  body  of 
which  he  was  the  chief  "  Truly,  a  very  probable  supposition  ;  but 
as  Sir  Wyville  Thomson's  tendencies  were  notoriously  anti- 
Darwinian,  it  does  not  appear  to  me  to  lend  the  slightest  justi- 
fication to  the  Duke  of  Argyll's  insinuation  that  the  Darwinian 
"terror"  influenced  him.  However,  the  question  was  finally 
set  at  rest  by  a  letter  which  appeared  in  "Nature"  (29th  of 
December,  1887),  in  which  the  writer  says  that : 

talking  with  Sir  "Wyville  about  "Murray's  new  theory,"  I 
asked  what  objection  he  had  to  its  being  brought  before  the 
public  ?  The  answer  simply  was :  he  considered  that  the 
grounds  of  the  theory  had  not,  as  yet,  been  sufficiently  investigated 
or  sufficiently  corroborated,  and  that  therefore  any  immature, 
dogmat-c  publication  of  it  would  do  less  than  little  service 
either  to  science  or  to  the  author  of  the  paper. 

Sir  Wyville  Thomson  was  an  intimate  friend  of  mine,  and  I 
am  glad  to  have  been  afforded  one  more  opportunity  of  clearing 
his  character  from  the  aspersions  which  have  been  so  recklessly 
cast  upon  his  good  sense  and  his  scientific  honour, 

(6)  As  to  the  "overthrow"  of  Darwin's  theory,  which, 
according  to  the  Duke  of  Argyll,  was  patent  to  every  un- 
prejudiced person  four  years  ago,  I  have  recently  become 
acquainted  with  a  work,  in  which  a  really  competent  authority,^ 
thoroughly  acquainted  with  all  the  new  lights  which  have  been 
thrown  upon  the  subject  during  the  last  ten  years,  pronounces 
the  judgment ;  firstly,  that  some  of  the  facts  brought  forward 
by  Messrs.  Murray  and  Guppy  against  Darwin's  theory  are  not 
facts  ;  secondly,  that  the  others  are  reconcilable  with  Darwin's 
theory;  and,  thirdly,  that  the  theories  of  Messrs.  Murray  and 


^  Dr.    Langonbeck,    Die    Theorien   iiher  die  Entstehung  der 
Korallen- Inseln  und  Kor alien- Uiffe  (p.  13),  1890. 


286  hasisadra's  adventure  vh 

Guppy    "are    contradicted    by  a  series  of   important    facts" 

(p.  13). 

Perhaps  I  had  better  draw  attention  to  the  circumstance  th^t 
Dr.  Langenbeck  writes  under  shelter  of  the  guns  of  the  fortress 
of  Strasburg  ;  and  may  tlierefore  be  presumed  to  be  unaffected 
by  those  dreams  of  a  " Reign  of  Terror"  which  seem  to  disturb 
the  peace  of  some  of  us  in  these  islands  (April,  1891). 

[See,  on  the  subject  of  this  note,  the  essay  entitled  "An 
Episcopal  Trilogy  "  in  the  following  volume,] 


VIII 

THE  EVOLUTION  OF   THEOLOGY :   AN 
ANTHROPOLOGICAL  STUDY 

[1886] 

I  CONCEIVE  that  the  origin,  the  growth,  the 
decline,  and  the  fall  of  those  speculations  re- 
specting the  existence,  the  powers,  and  the 
dispositions  of  beings  analogous  to  men,  but 
more  or  less  devoid  of  corporeal  qualities,  which 
may  be  broadly  included  under  the  head  of 
theology,  are  phenomena  the  study  of  which 
legitimately  falls  within  the  province  of  the 
anthropologist.  And  it  is  purely  as  a  question 
of  anthropology  (a  department  of  biology  to  which, 
at  various  times,  I  have  given  a  good  deal  of 
attention)  that  I  propose  to  treat  of  the  evolution 
of  theology  in  the  following  pages. 

With  theology  as  a  code  of  dogmas  which  are 
to  be  believed,  or  at  any  rate  repeated,  under 
penalty  of  present  or  future  punishment,  or  as  a 
storehouse  of  ansesthetics  for  those  who  find  the 
pains  of  life  too  hard  to  bear,  I  have  nothing  to 


288  THE   EVOLUTION   OF  THEOLOGY  vill 

do ;  and,  so  far  as  it  may  he  possible,  I  shall 
avoid  the  expression  of  any  opinion  as  to  the 
objective  truth  or  falsehood  of  the  systems  of 
theological  speculation  of  which  I  may  find 
occasion  to  speak.  From  my  present  point  of 
view,  theology  is  regarded  as  a  natural  product 
of  the  operations  of  the  human  mind,  under  the 
conditions  of  its  existence,  just  as  any  other  branch 
of  science,  or  the  arts  of  architecture,  or  music, 
or  painting  are  such  products.  Like  them, 
theology  has  a  history.  Like  them  alsoi,  it  is 
to  be  met  with  in  certain  simple  and  rudimentary 
forms ;  and  these  can  be  connected  by  a  multitude 
of  gradations,  which  exist  or  have  existed,  among 
people  of  various  ages  and  races,  with  the  most 
highly  developed  theologies  of  past  and  present 
times.  It  is  not  my  object  to  interfere,  even 
in  the  slightest  degree,  with  beliefs  which 
anybody  holds  sacred ;  or  to  alter  the  conviction 
of  any  one  who  is  of  opinion  that,  in  dealing 
with  theology,  we  ought  to  be  guided  by  con- 
siderations different  from  those  which  would  be 
thought  appropriate  if  the  problem  lay  in  the 
province  of  chemistry  or  of  mineralogy.  And  if 
people  of  these  ways  of  thinking  choose  to  read 
beyond  the  present  paragraph,  the  responsibility 
for  meeting  with  anything  they  may  dislike  rests 
with  them  and  not  with  me. 

We  are  all  likely  to  be  more  familiar  with  the 


VIII 


THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  289 


theological   history   of  the    Israelites   than  with 
that   of  any    other   nation.     We   may    therefore 
fitly  make  it  the  first  object  of  our  studies  ;  and 
it   will   he   convenient   to    commence   with   that 
period  which  lies  between  the  invasion  of  Canaan 
and  the  early  days  of  the  monarchy,  and  answers 
to   the   eleventh   and    twelfth    centuries   B.C.    or 
thereabouts.     The  evidence  on  which    any  con- 
clusion as  to  the  nature  of  Israelitic  theology  in 
those  days   must   be   based  is  wholly  contained 
in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures— an  agglomeration  of 
documents  which  certainly  belong  to  very  different 
ages,  but  of  the  exact  dates  and  authorship  of 
any  one    of    which   (except    perhaps   a    few    of 
the  prophetical   writings)   there    is  no    evidence, 
either   internal    or    external,    so    far   as   I    can 
discover,  of  such  a  nature  as  to  justify  more  than 
a  confession  of  ignorance,  or,  at  most,  an  approxi- 
mate  conclusion.     In   this    venerable   record    of 
ancient  life,  miscalled  a  book,  when  it  is  really 
a   library   comparable    to   a    selection   of    works 
from   English   hterature   between   the   times    of 
Beda  and° those  of  Milton,  we  have  the  stratified 
deposits    (often   confused   and    even   with    their 
natural  order  inverted)  left  by  the  stream  of  the 
intellectual  and  moral  life  of  Israel  during  many 
centuries.     And,  embedded  in  these  strata,  there 
are  numerous  remains  of  forms  of  thought  which 
once  lived,  and  which,  though  often  unfortunately 
mere   fragments,   are   of   priceless   value   to   the 
108 


290  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  viil 

anthropologist.  Our  task  is  to  rescue  these  from 
their  relatively  unimportant  surroundings,  and  by 
careful  comparison  with  existing  forms  of  theology 
to  make  the  dead  world  which  they  record  live 
again.  In  other  words,  our  problem  is  palseon- 
tological,  and  the  method  pursued  must  be  the 
same  as  that  employed  in  dealing  with  other 
fossil  remains. 

Among  the  richest  of  the  fossiliferous  strata 
to  which  I  have  alluded  are  the  books  of  Judges 
and  Samuel.^  It  has  often  been  observed  that 
these  writings  stand  out,  in  marked  relief  from 
those  which  precede  and  follow  them,  in  virtue 
of  a  certain  archaic  freshness  and  of  a  greater 
freedom  from  traces  of  late  interpolation  and 
editorial  trimming.  Jephthah,  Gideon  and 
Samson  are  men  of  old  heroic  stamp,  who 
would  look  as  much  in  place  in  a  Norse  Saga 
as  where  they  are  ;  and  if  the  varnish-brush  of 
later  respectability  has  passed  over  these  memoirs 
of  the  mighty  men  of  a  wild  age,  here  and  there, 
it  has  not  succeeded  in  effacing,  or  even  in  seriously 


^  Even  the  most  sturdy  believers  in  the  popular  theory  that 
the  proper  or  titular  names  attached  to  the  books  of  the  Bible 
are  those  of  their  authors  will  hardly  be  prepared  to  maintain 
that  Jephthah,  Gideon,  and  their  colleagues  wrote  the  book  of 
Judges.  Nor  is  it  easily  admissible  that  Samuel  wrote  the  two 
books  which  pass  under  his  name,  one  of  which  deals  entirely 
with  events  which  took  place  after  his  death.  In  fact,  no  one 
knows  who  wrote  either  Judges  or  Samuel,  nor  when,  within 
the  range  of  100  years,  their  present  form  was  given  to  these 
books. 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  291 

obscuring,  the  essential  characteristics  of  the 
theology  traditionally  ascribed  to  their  epoch. 

There  is  nothing  that  I  have  met  with  in  the 
results  of  Biblical  criticism  inconsistent  with  the 
conviction  that  these  books  give  us  a  fairly 
trustworthy  account  of  Israelitic  life  and  thought 
in  the  times  which  they  cover;  and,  as  such, 
apart  from  the  great  literary  merit  of  many  of 
their  episodes,  they  possess  the  interest  of  being, 
perhaps,  the  oldest  genuine  history,  as  apart 
from  mere  chronicles  on  the  one  hand  and 
mere  legends  on  the  other,  at  present  access- 
ible to  us. 

But  it  is  often  said  with  exultation  by  writers 
of  one  party,  and  often  admitted,  more  or  less 
unwillingly,  by  their  opponents,  that  these  books 
are  untrustworthy,  by  reason  of  being  full  of 
obviously  unhistoric  tales.  And,  as  a  notable 
example,  the  narrative  of  Saul's  visit  to  the 
so-called  "witch  of  Endor"  is  often  cited.  As 
I  have  already  intimated,  I  have  nothing  to  do 
with  theological  partisanship,  either  heterodox  or 
orthodox,  nor,  for  my  present  purpose,  does  it 
matter  very  much  whether  the  story  is  historically 
true,  or  whether  it  merely  shows  what  the  writer 
believed ;  but,  looking  at  the  matter  solely  from 
the  point  of  view  of  an  anthropologist,  I  beg  leave 
to  express  the  opinion  that  the  account  of  Saul's 
necromantic  exi^edition  is  quite  consistent  with 
probability.     That   is   to    say,    I   see    no   reason 


292  THE  EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  viii 

whatever  to  doubt,  firstly,  that  Saul  made  such 
a  visit ;  and,  secondly,  that  he  and  all  who  were 
present,  including  the  wise  woman  of  Endor 
herself,  would  have  given,  with  entire  sincerity, 
very  much  the  same  account  of  the  business 
as  that  which  we  now  read  in  the  twenty-eighth 
chapter  of  the  first  book  of  Samuel ;  and  I  am 
further  of  opinion  that  this  story  is  one  of  the 
most  important  of  those  fossils,  to  which  I  have 
referred,  in  the  material  which  it  offers  for  the 
reconstruction  of  the  theology  of  the  time.  Let 
us  therefore  study  it  attentively — not  merely 
as  a  narrative  which,  in  the  dramatic  force  of  its 
gruesome  simplicity,  is  not  surpassed,  if  it  is 
equalled,  by  the  witch  scenes  in  Macbeth — but  as 
a  piece  of  evidence  bearing  on  an  important 
anthropological  problem. 

We  are  told  (1  Sam.  xxviii.)  that  Saul,  en- 
camped at  Gilboa,  became  alarmed  by  the  strength 
of  the  Philistine  army  gathered  at  Shunem.  He 
therefore  "  inquired  of  Jahveh,"  but  "  Jahveh 
answered  him  not,  neither  by  dreams,  nor  by 
Urim,  nor  by  prophets."^  Thus  deserted  by 
Jahveh,  Saul,  in  his  extremity,  bethought  him  of 
"  those  that  had  familiar  spirits,  and  the  wizards," 
whom  he  is  said,  at  some  previous  time,  to  have 
**  put  out  of  the  land  "  ;  but  who  seem,  neverthe- 
less, to  have  been  very  imperfectly  banished,  since 

^  My  citations  are  taken  from  the  Revised  Version,  hut  for 
Lord  and  God  I  have  substituted  Jahveh  and  Elohim. 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION    OF    THEOLOGY  293 

Saul's  servants,  in  answer  to  his  command  to  seek 
him  a  woman  "  that  hath  a  famiHar  spirit,"  reply 
without  a  sign  of  hesitation  or  of  fear,  "  Behold, 
there  is  a  woman  that  hath  a  familiar  spirit  at 
Endor "  ;  just  as,  in  some  parts  of  England,  a 
countryman  might  tell  any  one  who  did  not  look 
like  a  magistrate  or  a  policeman,  where  a  "  wise 
woman  "  was  to  be  met  with.  Saul  goes  to  this 
woman,  who,  after  being  assured  of  immunity, 
asks,  "  Whom  shall  I  bring  up  to  thee  ?  "  where- 
upon Saul  says,  "  Bring  me  up  Samuel."  The 
woman  immediately  sees  an  apparition.  But  to 
Saul  nothing  is  visible,  for  he  asks,  "  What  seest 
thou  ? "  And  the  woman  replies,  "  I  see  Elohim 
coming  up  out  of  the  earth."  Still  the  spectre 
remains  invisible  to  Saul,  for  he  asks,  "  What 
form  is  he  of  ?  "  And  she  replies,  "  An  old  man 
Cometh  up,  and  he  is  covered  with  a  robe."  So 
far,  therefore,  the  wise  woman  unquestionably 
plays  the  part  of  a  "  medium,"  and  Saul  is  depen- 
dent upon  her  version  of  what  happens. 
The  account  continues  : — 

And  Saul  perceived  that  it  was  Samuel,  and  he  bowed  with 
his  face  to  the  ground  and  did  obeisance.  And  Samuel  said  to 
Saul,  Why  hast  thou  disquieted  me  to  bring  me  up  ?  And  Saul 
answered,  I  am  sore  distressed  :  for  the  Philistines  make  war 
against  me,  and  Elohim  is  departed  from  me  and  answereth  me 
no  more,  neither  by  prophets  nor  by  dreams ;  therefore  I  have 
called  thee  that  thou  mayest  make  known  unto  me  what  I  shall 
do.  And  Samuel  said,  Wherefore  then  dost  thou  ask  of  me, 
seeing  that  Ja^iveh  is  departed  from  thee  and  is  become  thine 


294  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vm 

adversary  ?  And  Jahveh  hath  wrought  for  himself,  as  he  spake 
by  me,  and  Jahveh  hath  rent  the  kingdom  out  of  thine  hand  and 
given  it  to  thy  neighbour,  even  to  David.  Because  thou 
obeyedst  not  the  voice  of  Jahveh  and  didst  not  execute  his 
fierce  wrath  upon  Amalek,  therefore  hath  Jahveh  done  this 
thing  unto  thee  this  day.  Moreover,  Jahveh  will  deliver  Israel 
also  with  thee  into  the  hands  of  the  Philistines  ;  and  to-morrow 
shalt  thou  and  thy  sons  be  with  me  :  Jahveh  shall  deliver  the 
host  of  Israel  also  into  the  hand  of  the  Philistines.  Then  Saul 
fell  straightway  his  full  length  upon  the  earth  and  was  sore 
afraid  because  of  the  words  of  Samuel     .     .     .   (v.  14-20). 

The  statement  that  Saul  "  perceived  "  that  it 
was  Samuel  is  not  to  be  taken  to  imply  that,  even 
now,  Saul  actually  saw  the  shade  of  the  prophet, 
but  onl}^  that  the  woman's  allusion  to  the  pro- 
phetic mantle  and  to  the  aged  appearance  of 
the  spectre  convinced  him  that  it  was  Samuel. 
Reuss  ^  in  fact  translates  the  passage  "  Alors  Saul 
reconnut  que  c'etait  Samuel."  Nor  does  the 
dialogue  between  Saul  and  Samuel  necessarily,  or 
probably,  signify  that  Samuel  spoke  otherwise 
than  by  the  voice  of  the  wise  woman.  The  Sept- 
iiagint  does  not  hesitate  to  call  her  €yyaarpL/uLv6o<;, 
that  is  to  say,  a  ventriloquist,  implying  that  it 
was  she  who  spoke — and  this  view  of  the  matter 

^  I  need  hardly  say  that  I  depend  upon  authoritative  Biblical 
critics,  whenever  a  question  of  interpretation  of  the  text 
arises.  As  Reuss  appears  to  me  to  be  one  of  the  most  learned, 
acute,  and  fair-minded  of  those  whose  works  I  have  studied,  I 
have  made  most  use  of  the  commentary  and  dissertations  in  his 
splendid  French  edition  of  the  Bible.  But  I  have  also  ha:, 
recourse  to  the  works  of  Dillman,  Kalisch,  Kuenen,  Thenius, 
Tuch,  and  others,  in  cases  in  which  another  opinion  seemed 
desirable. 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  295 

is  in  harmony  with  the  fact  that  the  exact  sense 
of  the  Hebrew  words  which  are  translated  as  "  a 
woman  that  hath  a  familiar  spirit "  is  "  a  woman 
mistress  of  Oh,"  Oh  means  primitively  a  leather 
bottle,  such  as  a  wine  skin,  and  is  applied  alike  to 
the  necromancer  and  to  the  spirit  evoked.  Its 
use,  in  these  senses,  appears  to  have  been  sug- 
gested by  the  likeness  of  the  hollow  sound 
emitted  by  a  half-empty  skin  when  struck,  to 
the  sejDulchral  tones  in  which  the  oracles  of  the 
evoked  spirits  were  uttered  by  the  medium.  It 
is  most  probable  that,  in  accordance  with  the 
general  theory  of  spiritual  influences  which  ob- 
tained among  the  old  Israelites,  the  spirit  of 
Samuel  was  conceived  to  pass  into  the  body  of 
the  wise  woman,  and  to  use  her  vocal  organs  to 
speak  in  his  own  name — for  I  cannot  discover 
that  they  drew  any  clear  distinction  between 
possession  and  inspiration.^ 

If  the  story  of  Saul's  consultation  of  the  occult 
powers  is  to  be  regarded  as  an  authentic  narrative, 
or,  at  any  rate,  as  a  statement  which  is  perfectly 
veracious  so  far  as  the  intention  of  the  narrator 
goes — and,  as  I  have  said,  I  see  no  reason  for  re- 
fusing it  this  character — it  will  be  found,  on 
further  consideration,  to  throw  a  flood  of  light, 
both  directly  and  indirectly,  on  the  theology  of 
Saul's   countrymen — that   is   to   say,  upon  their 

1  See  "Divination,"  by  Hazoral,  Joiornal  of  Anthropology ^ 
Bombay,  voL  i.  No.  1. 


ti96  THE   EVOLUTION    OF   THEOLOGY  VUI 

beliefs  respecting  the  nature  and  ways  of  spiritual 
beings. 

Even  without  tlie  confirmation  of  other 
abundant  evidences  to  the  same  effect,  it  leaves  no 
doubt  as  to  the  existence,  among  them,  of  the  fun- 
damental doctrine  that  man  consists  of  a  body  and 
of  a  spirit,  which  last,  after  the  death  of  the  body, 
continues  to  exist  as  a  ghost.  At  the  time  of 
Saul's  visit  to  Endor,  Samuel  was  dead  and 
buried ;  but  that  his  spirit  would  be  believed  to 
continue  to  exist  in  Sheol  may  be  concluded  from 
the  well-known  passage  in  the  song  attributed  to 
Hannah,  his  mother  : — 

Jahveh  killeth  and  maketh  alive  ; 

He  bringeth  down  to  Sheol  and  bringetli  up. 

(1  Sam.  ii.  6.) 

And  it  is  obvious  that  this  Sheol  was  thought  to 
be  a  place  underground  in  which  Samuel's  spirit 
had  been  disturbed  by  the  necromancer's  summons, 
and  in  which,  after  his  return  thither,  he  would 
be  joined  by  the  spirits  of  Saul  and  his  sons  Avhen 
they  had  met  with  their  bodily  death  on  the  hill 
of  Gilboa.  It  is  further  to  be  observed  that  the 
spirit,  or  ghost,  of  the  dead  man  presents  itself  as 
the  image  of  the  man  himself — it  is  the  man,  not 
merely  in  his  ordinary  corporeal  presentment  (even 
down  to  the  prophet's  mantle)  but  in  his  moral  and 
intellectual  characteristics.  Samuel,  who  had  begun 
as  Saul's  friend  and  ended  as  his  bitter  enemy,  gives 


VIII  THE    EVOLUTION    OF   THEOLOGY  297 

it  to  be  understood  that  he  is  annoyed  at  Saul's  pre- 
sumption in  disturbing  him ;  and  that,  in  Sheol, 
he  is  as  much  the  devoted  servant  of  Jahveh  and 
as  much  empowered  to  speak  in  Jahveh's  name 
as  he  was  during  his  sojourn  in  the  upper  air. 

It  appears  now  to  be  universally  admitted  that, 
before  the  exile,  the  Israelites  had  no  belief  in 
rewards  and  punishments  after  death,  nor  in  any- 
thing similar  to  the  Christian  heaven  and  hell; 
but  our  story  proves  that  it  would  be  an  error 
to  suppose  that  they  did  not  believe  in  the 
continuance  of  individual  existence  after  death 
by  a  ghostly  simulacrum  of  life.  Nay,  I  think  it 
would  be  very  hard  to  produce  conclusive  evidence 
that  they  disbelieved  in  immortality ;  for  I  am 
not  aware  that  there  is  anything  to  show  that  they 
thought  the  existence  of  the  souls  of  the  dead  in 
Sheol  ever  came  to  an  end.  But  they  do  not 
seem  to  have  conceived  that  the  condition  of  the 
souls  in  Sheol  was  in  any  way  affected  by 
their  conduct  in  life.  If  there  was  immortality, 
there  was  no  state  of  retribution  in  their  theology. 
Samuel  expects  Saul  and  his  sons  to  come  to  him 
in  Sheol. 

The  next  circumstance  to  be  remarked  is  that 
the  name  of  Eloliim  is  applied  to  the  spirit  which 
the  woman  sees  "  coming  up  out  of  the  earth," 
that  is  to  say,  from  Sheol.  The  Authorised  Version 
translates  this  in  its  literal  sense  "  gods."  The 
Revised  Version  gives  "  god  "  with  "  gods  "  in  the 


298  THE  EVOLUTION  OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

margin.  Reuss  renders  the  word  by  "  spectre," 
remarking  in  a  note  that  it  is  not  quite  exact ; 
but  that  the  word  Elohim  expresses  "  something 
divine,  that  is  to  say,  superhuman,  commanding 
respect  and  terror "  ( "  Histoire  des  Israelites," 
p.  321).  Tuch,  in  his  commentary  on  Genesis,  and 
Thenius,  in  his  commentary  on  Samuel,  express 
substantially  the  same  opinion.  Dr.  Alexander 
(in  Kitto's  "  Cyclopaedia  "  s.  v.  "  God ")  has  the 
following  instructive  remarks  : — 

{Elohim  is]  sometimes  used  vaguely  to  describe  unseen  powers 
or  superhuman  beings  that  are  not  properly  thought  of  as 
divine.  Thus  the  witch  of  Endor  saw  ' '  Elohim  ascending  out 
of  the  earth"  (1  Sam.  xxviii.  13),  meaning  thereby  some  beings 
of  an  unearthly,  superhuman  character.  So  also  in  Zechariah 
xii.  8,  it  is  said  "the  house  of  David  shall  be  as  Elohim,  as  the 
angel  of  the  Lord,"  where,  as  the  transition  from  Elohim  to  the 
angel  of  the  Lord  is  a  minori  ad  majus,  we  must  regard  the 
former  as  a  vague  designation  of  supernatural  powers. 

Dr.  Alexander  speaks  here  of  "  beings  " ;  but 
there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  wise  woman 
of  Endor  referred  to  anything  but  a  solitary 
spectre;  and  it  is  quite  clear  that  Saul  under- 
stood her  in  this  sense,  for  he  asks  "  What  form 
is  HE  of?" 

This  fact,  that  the  name  of  Elohim  is  applied 
to  a  ghost,  or  disembodied  soul,  conceived  as  the 
image  of  the  body  in  which  it  once  dwelt,  is  of  no 
little  importance.  For  it  is  is  well  known  that 
the  same  term  was  employed  to  denote  the  gods 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION    OF    THEOLOGY  299 

of  the  heathen,  who  were  thought  to  have  definite 
quasi-corporeal  forms  and  to  be  as  much  real 
entities  as  any  other  Elohim.^  The  difference 
which  was  supposed  to  exist  between  the  different 
Elohim  was  one  of  degree,  not  one  of  kind. 
Elohim  was,  in  logical  terminology,  the  genus  of 
which  ghosts,  Chemosh,  Dagon,  Baal,  and  Jahveh 
were  species.  The  Israelite  believed  Jahveh  to  be 
immeasurably  superior  to  all  otlier  kinds  of 
Elohim.  The  inscription  on  the  Moabite  stone 
shows  that  King  Mesa  held  Chemosh  to  be,  as 
unquestionably,  the  superior  of  Jahveh.  But  if 
Jahveh  was  thus  supposed  to  differ  only  in  degree 
from  the  undoubtedly  zoomorphic  or  anthropo- 
morphic "  gods  of  the  nations,"  why  is  it  to  be 
assumed  that  he  also  was  not  thought  of  as  hav- 
ing a  human  shape  ?  It  is  possible  for  those  who 
forget  that  the  time  of  the  great  prophetic 
writers  is  at  least  as  remote  from  that  of  Saul  as 
our  day  is  from  that  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  to  insist 
upon  interpreting  the  gross  notions  current  in  the 
earlier  age  and  among  the  mass  of  the  people  by 
the  refined  conceptions  promulgated  by  a  few 
select  spirits  centuries  later.  But  if  we  take  the 
language  constantly  used  concerning  the  Deity  in 

1  See,  for  example,  the  message  of  Jephthah  to  the  King  of 
the  Ammonites  :  "So  now  Jahveh,  the  Elohim  of  Israel,  hath 
dispossessed  the  Amorites  from  before  his  people  Israel,  and 
shouldest  thou  possess  them  ?  Wilt  not  thou  possess  that  which 
Chemosh,  thy  Elohim,  giveth  thee  to  possess?"  (Jud.  xi.  23,  24). 
For  Jephthah,  Chemosh  is  obviously  as  real  a  personage  as 
Jahveh. 


800  THE   EVOLUTION   OF  THEOLOGY  vill 

the  books  of  Genesis,  Exodus,  Joshua,  Judges, 
Samuel,  or  Kings,  in  its  natural  sense  (and  I  am 
aware  of  no  valid  reason  which  can  be  given  for 
taking  it  in  any  other  sense),  there  cannot,  to  my 
mind,  be  a  doubt  that  Jahveh  was  conceived  by 
those  from  whom  the  substance  of  these  books  is 
mainly  derived,  to  possess  the  appearance  and  the 
intellectual  and  moral  attributes  of  a  man ;  and, 
indeed,  of  a  man  of  just  that  type  with  which  the 
Israelites  were  familiar  in  their  stronger  and 
intellectually  abler  rulers  and  leaders.  In  a  well- 
known  passage  in  Genesis  (i.  27)  Elohim  is  said  to 
have  "created  man  in  his  own  image,  in  the 
image  of  Elohim  created  he  him."  It  is  "man" 
who  is  here  said  to  be  the  image  of  Elohim — not 
man's  soul  alone,  still  less  his  "  reason,"  but  the 
whole  man.  It  is  obvious  that  for  those  who  call 
a  manlike  ghost  Elohim,  there  could  be  no 
difficulty  in  conceiving  any  other  Elohim  under 
the  same  aspect.  And  if  there  could  be  any 
doubt  on  this  subject,  surely  it  cannot  stand  in  the 
face  of  what  we  find  in  the  fifth  chapter,  where, 
immediately  after  a  repetition  of  the  statement 
that  "Elohim  created  man,  in  the  likeness  of 
Elohim  made  he  him,"  it  is  said  that  Adam  begat 
Seth  "in  his  own  likeness,  after  his  image.'* 
Does  this  mean  that  Seth  resembled  Adam  only 
in  a  spiritual  and  figurative  sense  ?  And  if  that 
interpretation  of  the  third  verse  of  the  fifth 
chapter   of  Genesis   is  absurd,  why   does  it    be- 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  301 

come   reasonable  in  the   first  verse  of  the  same 
chapter  ? 

But  let  us  go  further.  Is  not  the  Jahveh  who 
"  walks  in  the  garden  in  the  cool  of  the  day  "  ; 
from  whom  one  may  hope  to  "  hide  oneself  among 
the  trees "  ;  of  whom  it  is  expressly  said  that 
*'  Moses  and  Aaron,  Nadab  and  Abihu,  and 
seventy  of  the  elders  of  Israel,"  saw  the  Elohim 
of  Israel  (Exod.  xxiv.  9-11)  ;  and  that,  although 
the  seeino^  Jahveh  was  understood  to  be  a  hiofh 
crime  and  misdemeanour,  worthy  of  death,  under 
ordinary  circumstances,  yet,  for  this  once,  he  "  laid 
not  his  hand  on  the  nobles  of  Israel  "  ;  "  that  they 
beheld  Elohim  and  did  eat  and  drink  " ;  and  that 
afterwards  Moses  saw  his  back  (Exod.  xxxiii.  23) 
— is  not  this  Deity  conceived  as  manlike  in  form  ? 
Again,  is  not  the  Jahveh  who  eats  with  Abraham 
under  the  oaks  at  Mamre,  who  is  pleased  with  the 
"  sweet  savour "  of  Noah's  sacrifice,  to  whom 
sacrifices  are  said  to  be  "  food  "  ^ — is  not  this 
Deity  depicted  as  possessed  of  human  appetites  ? 
If  this  were  not  the  current  Israelitish  idea  of 
Jahveh  even  in  the  eighth  century  B.C.,  where  is 
the  point  of  Isaiah's  scathing  admonitions  to  his 
countrymen  :  "  To  what  purpose  is  the  multitude 
of  your  sacrifices  unto  me  ?  saith  Jahveh  :  I  am 
full   of  the  burnt-offerings  of  rams  and  the   fat 

^  For  example:  "My  oblation,  my  food  for  my  offerings 
made  by  fire,  of  a  sweet  savour  to  me,  shall  ye  observe  to  offer 
unto  me  in  their  due  season  "  (Num.  xxviii.  2). 


802      THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THEOLOGY      vm 

of  fed  beasts ;  and  I  delight  not  in  the  blood  of 
bullocks,  or  of  lambs,  or  of  he-goats"  (Isa.  i.  11). 
Or  of  Micah's  inquiry,  "  Will  Jahveh  be  pleased 
with  thousands  of  rams  or  with  ten  thousands  of 
rivers  of  oil  ?  "  (vi.  7.)  And  in  the  innumerable 
passages  in  which  Jahveh  is  said  to  be  jealous  of 
other  gods,  to  be  angry,  to  be  appeased,  and  to 
repent ;  in  which  he  is  represented  as  casting  off 
Saul  because  the  king  does  not  quite  literally 
execute  a  command  of  the  most  ruthless  severity  ; 
or  as  smiting  Uzzah  to  death  because  the  un- 
fortunate man  thoughtlessly,  but  naturally  enough, 
put  out  his  hand  to  stay  the  ark  from  falling — 
can  any  one  deny  that  the  old  Israelites  con- 
ceived Jahveh  not  only  in  the  image  of  a  man, 
but  in  that  of  a  changeable,  irritable,  and,  occa- 
sionally, violent  man?  There  appears  to  me, 
then,  to  be  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  notion  of 
likeness  to  man,  which  was  indubitably  held  of 
the  ghost  Elohim,  was  carried  out  consistently 
throuohout  the  whole  series  of  Elohim,  and  that 
Jahveh-Elohim  was  thought  of  as  a  being  of  the 
same  substantially  human  nature  as  the  rest,  only 
immeasurably  more  powerful  for  good  and  for  evil. 
The  absence  of  any  real  distinction  between 
the  Elohim  of  different  ranks  is  further  clearly 
illustrated  by  the  corresponding  absence  of  any 
sharp  delimitation  between  the  various  kinds  of 
people  who  serve  as  the  media  of  communication 
between  them   and    men.     The    agents   through 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF  THEOLOGY  303 

whom  the  lower  Elohim  are  consulted  are  called 
necromancers,  wizards,  and  diviners,  and  are 
looked  down  upon  by  the  prophets  and  priests  of 
the  higher  Elohim  ;  but  the  "  seer  "  connects  the 
two,  and  they  are  all  alike  in  their  essential 
characters  of  media.  The  wise  woman  of  Endor 
was  believed  by  others,  and,  I  have  little  doubt, 
believed  herself,  to  be  able  to  "  bring  up  "  whom 
she  would  from  Sheol,  and  to  be  inspired,  whether 
in  virtue  of  actual  possession  by  the  evoked 
Elohim,  or  otherwise,  with  a  knowledge  of  hidden 
things.  I  am  unable  to  see  that  Saul's  servant 
took  any  really  different  view  of  Samuel's  powers, 
though  he  may  have  believed  that  he  obtained 
them  by  the  grace  of  the  higher  Elohim.  For 
Vv^hen  Saul  fails  to  find  his  father's  asses,  his 
servant  says  to  him — 

Behold,  there  is  in  this  city  a  man  of  Elohim,  and  he  is  a 
man  that  is  held  in  honour  ;  all  that  he  saith  cometh  surely  to 
pass  :  now  let  us  go  thither  ;  peradventure  he  can  tell  us  con- 
cerning our  journey  whereon  we  go.  Then  said  Saul  to  his 
servant,  But  behold  if  we  go,  what  shall  we  bring  the  man  ?  for 
the  bread  is  spent  in  our  vessels  and  there  is  not  a  present  to 
bring  to  the  man  of  Elohim.  What  have  we  ?  And  the  servant 
answered  Saul  again  and  said.  Behold  I  have  in  my  hand  the 
fourth  part  of  a  shekel  of  silver  :  that  will  I  give  to  the  man  of 
Elohim  to  tell  us  our  way.  (Beforetime  in  Israel  when  a  man 
went  to  inquire  of  Elohim,  then  he  said.  Come  and  let  us  go  to 
the  Seer  :  for  he  that  is  now  called  a  Prophet  was  beforetime 
called  a  Seer  ')  (1  Sam.  ix.  6-10). 

'  In  2  Samuel  xv.  27  David  says  to  Zadok  the  priest,  "Art 
thou  not  a  seer  ? "  and  Gad  is  called  David's  seer. 


304  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

In  fact,  when,  shortly  afterwards,  Saul  accident- 
ally meets  Samuel,  he  says,  "  Tell  me,  I  pray  thee, 
where  the  Seer's  house  is."  Samuel  answers,  "  I 
am  the  Seer."  Immediately  afterwards  Samuel 
informs  Saul  that  the  asses  are  found,  though 
how  he  obtained  his  knowledge  of  the  fact  is  not 
stated.  It  will  be  observed  that  Samuel  is  not 
spoken  of  here  as,  in  any  special  sense,  a  seer  oi 
prophet  of  Jahveh,  but  as  a  "  man  of  Elohim  " — 
that  is  to  say,  a  seer  having  access  to  the 
"  spiritual  powers,"  just  as  the  wise  woman  of 
Endor  might  have  been  said  to  be  a  "  woman  of 
Elohim  " — and  the  narrator's  or  editor's  explana- 
tory note  seems  to  indicate  that  "  Prophet "  is 
merely  a  name,  introduced  later  than  the  time  of 
Samuel,  for  a  superior  kind  of  "  Seer,"  or  "  man 
of  Elohim."  1 

Another  very  instructive  passage  shows  that 
Samuel  was  not  only  considered  to  be  diviner, 
seer,  and  prophet  in  one,  but  that  he  was  also,  to 
all  intents  and  purposes,  priest  of  Jahveh — though, 
according  to  his  biographer,  he  was  not  a  member 
of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  At  the  outset  of  their 
acquaintance,  Samuel  says  to  Saul,  "  Go  up  before 
me  into  the  high  place,"  where,  as  the  young 
maidens  of  the  city  had  just  before  told  Saul,  the 


^  This  would  at  first  appear  to  be  inconsistent  with  the  use  of 
the  word  "prophetess"  lor  Deborah,  But  it  does  not  follow 
because  the  writer  of  Judcjes  applies  the  name  to  Deborah  that 
it  was  used  in  her  day. 


vm 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THEOLOGY     305 


Seer  was  going,  "  for  the  people  will  not  eat  till 
he  come,  because  he  doth  bless  the  sacrifice" 
(1  Sam.  X.  12).  The  use  of  the  word  "bless" 
l^ere — as  if  Samuel  were  not  going  to  sacrifice,  but 
only  to  offer  a  blessing  or  thanksgiving— is  curi- 
ous. But  that  Samuel  really  acted  as  priest 
seems  plain  from  what  follows.  For  he  not  only 
asks  Saul  to  share  in  the  customary  sacrificial 
feast,  but  he  disposes  in  Saul's  favour  of  that 
portion  of  the  victim  which  the  Levitical  legisla- 
tion, doubtless  embodying  old  customs,  recognises 
as  the  priest's  special  property.^ 

Although  particular  persons  adopted  the  pro- 
fession of  media  between  men  and  Elohim,  there 
was  no  limitation  of  the  power,  in  the  view  of 
ancient  Israel,  to  any  special  class  of  the 
population.  Saul  inquires  of  Jahveh  and  builds 
him  altars  on  his  own  account ;  and  in  the  very 
remarkable  story  told  in  the  fourteenth  chapter  of 
the  first  book  of  Samuel  (v.  37-46),  Saul  appears 
to    conduct    the    whole    process    of    divination, 

1  Samuel  tells  the  cook,  "Bring  the  portion  which  I  gave 
thee,  of  which  I  said  to  thee,  Set  it  by  thee."  It  was  therefore 
Samuel's  to  give.  "And  the  cook  took  up  the  thigh  (or 
shoulder)  and  that  which  was  u]>on  it  and  set  it  before  Saul." 
But,  in  the  Levitical  regulations,  it  is  the  thigh  (or  shoulder) 
which  he.omes  the  priest's  own  property.  "And  the  right 
thigh  (or  shoulder)  shall  ye  give  unto  the  priest  for  an  heave- 
otVeiing,"  which  is  given  along  with  the  wave  breast  "unto 
Aaron  ""the  priest  ami  unto  his  sous  as  a  due  for  ever  from  the 
children  of  Israel"  (Lev.  vii.  31-34).  Reuss  writes  on  this 
passage  :  "  La  cuisse  n'est  point  agitee,  mais  simplement  prilc.ie 
8ur  ce'iiue  les  convives  mangerout." 
109 


306      THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THEOLOGY      vm 

although  he  has  a  priest  at  his  elbow.  David 
seems  to  do  the  same. 

Moreover,  Elohim  constantly  appear  in  dreams 
— which  in  old  Israel  did  not  mean  that,  as  we 
should  say,  the  subject  of  the  appearance 
"  dreamed  he  saw  the  spirit " ;  but  that  he 
veritably  saw  the  Elohim  which,  as  a  soul,  visited 
his  soul  while  his  body  was  asleep.  And,  in  the 
course  of  the  history  of  Israel,  Jahveh  himself 
thus  appears  to  all  sorts  of  persons,  non-Israelites 
as  well  as  Israelites.  Again,  the  Elohim  possess, 
or  inspire,  people  against  their  will,  as  in  the  case 
of  Saul  and  Saul's  messengers,  and  then  these 
people  prophesy — that  is  to  say,  *'  rave  " — and 
exhibit  the  ungoverned  gestures  attributed  by  a 
later  age  to  possession  by  malignant  spirits. 
Apart  from  other  evidence  to  be  adduced  by  and 
by,  the  history  of  ancient  demonology  and  of 
modern  revivalism  does  not  permit  me  to  doubt 
that  the  accounts  of  these  phenomena  given  in 
the  history  of  Saul  may  be  perfectly  historical. 

In  the  ritual  practices,  of  which  evidence  is  to 
be  found  in  the  books  of  Judges  and  Samuel,  the 
chief  part  is  played  by  sacrifices,  usually  burnt 
offerings.  Whenever  the  aid  of  the  Elohim  of 
Israel  is  sought,  or  thanks  are  considered  due  to 
him,  an  altar  is  built,  and  oxen,  sheep,  and  goats 
are  slaughtered  and  offered  up.  Sometimes  the 
entire  victim  is  burnt  as  a  holocaust ;  more 
frequently   only    certain    parts,    notably   the   fat 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF    THEOLOGY  307 

about  the  kidneys,  are  burnt  on  the  altar.  The 
rest  is  properly  cooked  ;  and,  after  the  reservation 
of  a  part  for  the  priest,  is  made  the  foundation  of 
a  joyous  banquet,  in  which  the  sacrificer,  his 
family,  and  such  guests  as  he  thinks  fit  to  invite, 
participate.^  Elohim  v^^as  supposed  to  share  in 
the  feast,  and  it  has  been  already  shown  that  that 
which  was  set  apart  on  the  altar,  or  consumed  by 
fire,  was  spoken  of  as  the  food  of  Elohim,  who  was 
thought  to  be  influenced  by  the  costliness,  or  by 
the  pleasant  smell,  of  the  sacrifice  in  favour  of  the 
sacrificer. 

All  this  bears  out  the  view  that,  in  the  mind  of 
the  old  Israelite,  there  was  no  difference,  save  one 
of  degree,  between  one  Elohim  and  another.  It 
is  true  that  there  is  but  little  direct  evidence  to 
show  that  the  old  Israelites  shared  the  widespread 
belief  of  their  own,  and  indeed  of  all  times,  that 
the  spirits  of  the  dead  not  only  continue  to  exist, 
but  are  capable  of  a  ghostly  kind  of  feeding  and 
are  orrateful  for  such  aliment  as  can  be  assimilated 
by  their  attenuated  substance,  and  even  for 
clothes,    ornaments,   and   weapons.^      That   they 

^  See,  for  example,  Elkanah's  sacrifice,  1  Sam.  i.  3-9. 

2  The  p;host  was  not  supposed  to  be  capable  of  devouring  the 
gross  material  substance  of  the  offering  ;  but  his  vaporous  body- 
appropriated  the  smoke  of  the  burnt  sacrifice,  the  visible  and 
odorous  exhalations  of  other  off'erings.  The  blood  of  the  victim 
was  particularly  useful  because  it  was  thouglit  to  be  the  special 
seat  of  its  soul  or  life.  A  West  African  negro  replied  to  an 
European  sceptic :  "  Of  course,  the  spirit  cannot  eat  corporeal 
food,  but  he  extracts  its  spiritual  part,  and,  as  we  see,  leaves 
the  material  part  behind  "  (Lippert,  SeelencuU,  p.  16). 


308  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

were  familiar  with  this  doctrine  in  the  time  of  the 
captivity  is  suggested  hy  the  well-known  reference 
of  Ezekiel  (xxxii.  27)  to  the  "  mighty  that  are 
fallen  of  the  uncircnmcised,  which  are  gone  down 
to  [Sheol]  hell  with  their  weapons  of  war,  and 
have  laid  their  swords  under  their  heads." 
Perhaps  there  is  a  still  earlier  allusion  in  the 
"giving  of  food  for  the  dead"  spoken  of  in 
Deuteronomy  (xxvi.  14).^ 

It  must  be  remembered  that  the  literature  of 
the  old  Israelites,  as  it  lies  before  us,  has  been 
subjected  to  the  revisal  of  strictly  monotheistic 
editors,  violently  opposed  to  all  kinds  of  idolatry, 
who  are  not  likely  to  have  selected  from  the 
materials  at  their  disposal  any  obvious  evidence, 
either  of  the  practice  under  discussion,  or  of  that 
ancestor-worship  which  is  so  closely  related  to  it, 


^  It  is  further  well  worth  consideration  whether  indications 
of  former  ancestor-worship  are  not  to  be  found  in  the  singular 
weight  attached  to  the  veneration  of  parents  in  the  fourth 
commandment.  It  is  the  only  positive  commandment,  in 
addition  to  those  respecting  the  Deity  and  that  concerning  the 
Sabbath,  and  the  penalties  for  infringing  it  were  of  the  same 
character.  In  China,  a  corresponding  reverence  for  parents  is 
part  and  parcel  of  ancestor-worship  ;  so  in  ancient  Rome  and  in 
Greece  (where  parents  were  even  called  devrepoi  koI  iiriyeoi  deoi). 
The  fifth  commandment,  as  it  stands,  would  be  an  excellent 
compromise  between  ancestor-worship  and  monotheism.  The 
larger  hereditary  share  allotted  by  Israelitic  law  to  the 
eldest  son  reminds  one  of  the  privileges  attached  to  pri- 
mogeniture in  ancient  Rome,  which  were  closely  connected 
with  ancestor-worship.  There  is  a  good  deal  to  be  said  in 
favour  of  the  speculation  that  the  ark  of  the  covenant  may  have 
been  a  relic  of  ancestor- worship  ;  but  that  topic  is  too  large  to 
be  dealt  with  incidentally  in  this  place. 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  309 

for  preservation  in  the  permanent  records  of  their 
people. 

The  mysterious  objects  known  as  TeraijJiim, 
which  are  occasionally  mentioned  in  Judges, 
Samuel,  and  elsewhere,  however,  can  hardly  be 
interpreted  otherwise  than  as  indications  of  the 
existence  both  of  ancestor- worship  and  of  image- 
worship  in  old  Israel.  The  terajDhim  were 
certainly  images  of  family  gods,  and,  as  such,  in 
all  probabilit}^  represented  deceased  ancestors. 
Laban  indignantly  demands  of  his  son-in-law, 
"  Wherefore  hast  thou  stolen  my  Elohim  ? "  which 
Rachel,  who  must  be  assumed  to  have  worshipped 
Jacob's  God,  Jahveh,  had  carried  off,  obviously 
because  she,  like  her  father,  believed  in  their 
divinity.  It  is  not  suggested  that  Jacob  was  in 
any  way  scandalised  by  the  idolatrous  practices  of 
his  favourite  wife,  whatever  he  may  have  thought 
of  her  honesty  when  the  truth  came  to  light ;  for 
the  teraphim  seem  to  have  remained  in  his  camp, 
at  least  until  he  "  hid  "  his  strange  gods  "  under 
the  oak  that  was  by  Shechem "  (Gen.  xxxv.  4). 
And  indeed  it  is  open  to  question  if  he  got  rid 
of  them  then,  for  the  subsequent  history  of  Israel 
renders  it  more  than  doubtful  whether  the 
teraphim  were  regarded  as  "  strange  gods  "  even 
as  late  as  the  eighth  century  B.C. 

The  writer  of  the  books  of  Samuel  takes  it 
quite  as  a  matter  of  course  that  Michal,  daughter 
of  one  royal  Jahveh  worshipper  and  wife  of  the 


310  THE    EVOLUTION    OF   THEOLOGY  VIII 

servant  of  Jahveli  par  excellence,  the  pious  David, 
should  have  her  teraphim  handy,  in  her  and 
David's  chamber,  when  she  dresses  them  up  in 
their  bed  into  a  simulation  of  her  husband,  for 
the  purpose  of  deceiving  her  father's  messengers. 
Even  one  of  the  early  prophets,  Hosea,  when  he 
threatens  that  the  children  of  Israel  shall  abide 
many  days  without  "  ephod  or  teraphim  "  (iii.  4), 
appears  to  regard  both  as  equally  proper  appur- 
tenances of  the  suspended  worship  of  Jahveh,  and 
equally  certain  to  be  restored  when  that  is 
resumed.  When  we  further  take  into  considera- 
tion that  only  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  was  the 
brazen  serpent,  preserved  in  the  temple  and 
believed  to  be  the  work  of  Moses,  destroyed,  and 
the  practice  of  offering  incense  to  it,  that  is, 
worshipping  it,  abolished — that  Jeroboam  could 
set  up  "  calves  of  gold "  for  Israel  to  worship, 
with  apparently  none  but  a  political  object,  and 
certainly  with  no  notion  of  creating  a  schism 
among  the  worshippers  of  Jahveh,  or  of  repelling 
the  men  of  Judah  from  his  standard — it  seems 
obvious,  either  that  the  Israelites  of  the  tenth 
and  eleventh  centuries  B.C.  knew  not  the  second 
commandment,  or  that  they  construed  it  merely 
as  part  of  the  jDrohibition  to  worship  any  supreme 
god  other  than  Jahveh,  which  precedes  it. 

In  seeking  for  information  about  the  teraphim, 
I  lighted  upon  the  following  passage  in  the 
valuable   article  on  that  subject  by  Archdeacon 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  311 

Farrar,     in     Kitto's     *' Cyclop?eclia  of    Biblical 

Literature,"  which   is  so   much   to  the   purpose 

of    my   argument,   that   I    venture  to   quote    it 
in  full :— 

The  main  and  certain  results  of  this  review  are  that  the 
teraphim  were  rude  human  images  ;  that  the  use  of  them  was 
an  antique  Aramaic  custom  ;  that  there  is  reason  to  suppose 
them  to  have  been  images  of  deceased  ancestors  ;  that  they 
were  consulted  oracularly  ;  that  they  were  not  confined  to 
Jews ;  that  their  use  continued  down  to  the  latest  period  of 
Jewish  history ;  and  lastly,  that  although  the  enlightened 
prophets  and  strictest  later  kings  regarded  them  as  idolatrous, 
the  priests  were  much  less  averse  to  such  images,  and  their  cult 
was  not  considered  in  any  way  repugnant  to  the  jjious  worship 
of  Elohim,  nay,  even  to  the  worship  of  him  *'  under  the  awful 
title  of  Jehovah. "  In  fact,  they  involved  a  monothi.  istic  idolatry 
fcry  different  indeed  from  pulythcism;  and  the  tolerance  of  them 
by  priests,  as  compared  with  the  denunciation  of  them  by  the 
prophets,  offers  a  close  analogy  to  the  views  of  the  Roman 
Catholics  respecting  pictures  and  images  as  compared  with  the 
views  of  Protestants.  It  was  against  this  use  of  idolatrous 
symbols  and  emblems  in  a  monotheistic  worship  that  the  second 
commandment  was  directed,  whereas  the  first  is  aimed  against 
the  graver  sin  of  direct  polytheism.  But  the  whole  history  of 
Israel  shows  how  utterly  and  how  early  the  law  must  have 
fallen  into  desuetude.  The  worship  of  the  golden  calf  and  of 
the  calves  at  Dan  and  Bethel,  against  which,  so  far  as 
we  know,  neither  Elijah  nor  Elisha  said  a  single  word  ;  the 
tolerance  of  high  places,  teraphim  and  betylia  ;  the  offering  of 
incense  for  centuries  to  the  brazen  serpent  destroyed  by 
Hezekiah  ;  the  occasional  glimpses  of  the  most  startling 
irregularities  sanctioned  apparently  even  in  the  temple  worship 
itself,  prove  most  decisively  that  a  pure  monotheism  and  an 
independence  of  symbols  was  the  result  of  a  slow  and  painful 
course  of  God's  disciplinal  dealings  among  the  noblest  thinkers 
of  a  single  nation,  and  not,  as  is  so  constantly  and  erroneously 


312  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

urged,  the  instinct  of  the  whole  Semitic  race  ;  in  other  words, 
one  single  branch  of  the  Semites  was  under  God's  providence 
edU'Cated  into  pure  monotheism  only  by  centuries  of  misfortune 
and  series  of  inspired  men  (vol.  iii.  p.  986). 

It  appears  to  me  that  the  researches  of  the 
anthropologist  lead  him  to  conclusions  identical 
in  substance,  if  not  in  terms,  with  those  here 
enunciated  as  the  result  of  a  careful  study 
of  the  same  subject  from  a  totally  different  point 
of  view. 

There  is  abundant  evidence  in  the  books  of 
Samuel  and  elsewhere  that  an  article  of  dress 
termed  an  cplicd  was  supposed  to  have  a  peculiar 
efficacy  in  enabling  the  wearer  to  exercise 
divination  by  means  of  Jahveh-Elohim.  Great 
and  long  continued  have  been  the  disputes  as  to 
the  exact  nature  of  the  ephod — whether  it  always 
means  something  to  wear,  or  whether  it  sometimes 
means  an  image.  But  the  probabilities  are  that 
it  usually  signifies  a  kind  of  waistcoat  or  broad 
zone,  with  shoulder-straps,  Avhich  the  person  who 
"inquired  of  Jahveh"  put  on.  In  1  Samuel 
xxiii.  2  David  appears  to  have  inquired  without  an 
ephod,  for  Abiathar  the  priest  is  said  to  have 
"  come  down  with  an  ephod  in  his  hand "  only 
subsequently.  And  then  David  asks  for  it  before 
inquiring  of  Jahveh  whether  the  men  of  Keilah 
would  betray  him  or  not.  David's  action  is 
obviously  divination  pure  and  simple ;  and  it 
is  curious  that  he  seems  to  have  worn  the  ephod 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION    OF   THEOLOGY  313 

himself  and  not  to  have  employed  Abiathar  as  a 
medium.  How  the  answer  was  given  is  not  clear, 
though  the  probability  is  that  it  was  obtained  by 
casting  lots.  The  Urim  and  Thummim  seem  to 
have  been  two  such  lots  of  a  peculiarly  sacred 
character,  which  were  carried  in  the  pocket 
of  the  high  priest's  ''  breastplate."  This  last  was 
worn  along  with  the  ephod. 

With  the  exception  of  one  passage  (1  Sam. 
xiv.  18)  the  ark  is  ignored  in  the  history  of  Saul. 
But  in  this  place  the  Septuagint  reads  "  ephod  " 
for  ark,  while  in  1  Chronicles  xiii.  3  David  says 
that  "  we  sought  not  unto  it  [the  ark]  in  the  days 
of  Saul."  Nor  does  Samuel  seem  to  have  paid 
any  regard  to  the  ark  after  its  return  from 
Philistia ;  though,  in  his  childhood,  he  is  said  to 
have  slept  in  "  the  temple  of  Jahveh,  where  the 
ark  of  Elohim  was "  (1  Sam.  iii.  3),  at  Shiloh, 
and  there  to  have  been  the  seer  of  the  earliest 
apparitions  vouchsafed  to  him  by  Jahveh.  The 
space  between  the  cherubim  or  winged  images 
on  the  canopy  or  cover  (^Kapporeth)  of  this  holy 
chest  was  held  to  be  the  special  seat  of  Jahveh — 
the  place  selected  for  a  temporary  residence  of 
the  Supreme  Elohim  who  had,  after  Aaron  and 
Phineas,  Eli  and  his  sons  for  priests  and  seers. 
And,  when  the  ark  was  carried  to  the  camp  at 
Eben-ezer,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
Israelites,  no  less  than  the  Philistines,  held  that 
"  Elohim  is  come  into  the  camp  "  (iv.  7),  and  that 


314  THE  EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

the  one,  as  much  as  the  other,  conceived  that 
the  Israelites  had  summoned  to  their  aid  a 
powerful  ally  in  "  these  (or  this)  mighty  Elohim  " 
— elsewhere  called  Jahve-Sabaoth,  the  Jahveh  of 
Hosts.  If  the  "  temple "  at  Shiloh  was  the 
pentateuchal  tabernacle,  as  is  suggested  by  the 
name  of  "  tent  of  meeting "  given  to  it  in 
1  Samuel  ii.  22,  it  was  essentially  a  large  tent, 
though  constituted  of  very  expensive  and  ornate 
materials ;  if,  on  the  other  band,  it  was  a  different 
edifice,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  this  "  house 
of  Jahveh  "  was  built  on  the  model  of  an  ordinary 
house  of  the  time.  But  there  is  not  the  slightest 
evidence  that,  during  the  reign  of  Saul,  any 
greater  importance  attached  to  this  seat  of  the 
cult  of  Jahveh  than  to  others.  Sanctuaries,  and 
"  high  places "  for  sacrifice,  were  scattered  all 
over  the  country  from  Dan  to  Beersheba.  And, 
as  Samuel  is  said  to  have  gone  up  to  one  of  these 
high  places  to  bless  the  sacrifice,  it  may  be  taken 
for  tolerably  certain  that  he  knew  nothing  of 
the  Levitical  laws  which  severely  condemn  the 
high  places  and  those  who  sacrifice  away  from 
the  sanctuary  hallowed  by  the  presence  of  the 
ark. 

There  is  no  evidence  that,  during  the  time 
of  the  Judges  and  of  Samuel,  any  one  occupied 
the  position  of  the  high  priest  of  later  days. 
And  persons  who  were  neither  priests  nor  Levites 
sacrificed  and  divined  or  "  inquired  of  Jahveh/' 


VIII 


THE  EVOLUTION   OF  THEOLOGY  315 

when  they  pleased  and  where  they  pleased,  with- 
out the  least  indication  that  they,  or  any  one  else 
in  Israel  at  that  time,  knew  they  were  doing 
wrong.  There  is  no  allusion  to  any  special 
observance  of  the  Sabbath  ;  and  the  references  to 
circumcision  are  indirect. 

Such   are  the  chief  articles  of  the  theological 
creed  of  the  old  Israelites,  which  are  made  known 
to  us  by  the  direct  evidence  of  the  ancient  record 
to   which   we   have   had  recourse,  and  they  are 
as  remarkable  for  that  which  they  contain  as  for 
that   which    is  absent  from  them.     They  reveal 
a  firm  conviction  that,  when  death  takes  place,  a 
something  termed  a  soul  or  spirit  leaves  the  body 
and  continues  to   exist  in  Sheol  for  a  period  of 
indefinite  duration,  even  though  there  is  no  proof 
of  any  belief  in  absolute  immortality ;  that  such 
spirits  can  return  to  earth  to  possess  and  inspire 
the  living ;  that  they  are,  in  appearance  and  in 
disposition,  likenesses  of  the  men  to  whom  they 
belonged,   but  that,  as  spirits,  they  have  larger 
powers  and  are  freer  from  physical   limitations; 
that  they  thus  form  a  group  among  a  number  of 
kinds  of  spiritual  existences  known  as  Elohim,  of 
whom  Jahveh,  the  national  God  of  Israel,  is  one ; 
that,  consistently  with  this  view,  Jahveh  was  con- 
ceived as  a  sort  of  spirit,  human  in  aspect  and  in 
senses,  and  with  many  human  passions,  but  with 
immensely  greater  intelligence  and  power   than 


816  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  viil 

any    other   Eloliim,   whether   human   or    divine. 
Further,  the  evidence  proves  that  this  beUef  was 
the  basis  of  the  Jahveh-worship  to  which  Samuel 
and  his  followers  were  devoted;   that   there    is 
strong  reason  for  believing,  and  none  for  doubting, 
that  idolatry,  in  the  shape  of  the  worship  of  the 
family  gods  or  teraphim,  was  practised  by  sincere 
and   devout   Jahveh-worshippers ;    that   the  ark, 
with  its  protective  tent  or  tabernacle,  was  regarded 
as    a    specially,    but   by    no   means   exclusively, 
favoured   sanctuary   of  Jahveh ;    that  the  ephod 
appears  to  have  had  a  particular  value  for  those 
who  desired  to  divine  by  the  help  of  Jahveh ;  and 
that     divination     by    lots    was    practised    before 
Jahveh.     On   the   other  hand,  there  is  not  the 
slightest  evidence  of  any  belief  in  retribution  after 
death,    but  the  contrary;  ritual  obligations  have 
at  least  as  strong  sanction  as  moral  ;  there  are 
clear  indications  that  some  of  the  most  stringent 
of    the    Levitical   laws   were   unknown   even   to 
Samuel ;  priests  often  appear  to  be  superseded  by 
laymen,  even  in  the  performance  of  sacrifices  and 
divination  ;    and  no  line  of  demarcation  can  be 
drawn  between  necromancer,  wizard,  seer,  prophet, 
and  priest,  each  of  whom  is  regarded,  like  all  the 
rest,  as  a  medium  of  communication  between  the 
world  of  Elohim  and  that  of  living  men. 

The  theological  system  thus  defined  offers  to 
the  anthropologist  no  feature  which  is  devoid  of  a 


Vm      THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THEOLOGY     317 

parallel  in  the  known  theologies  of  other  races  of 
mankind,  even  of  those  who  inhabit  parts  of  the 
world  most  remote  from  Palestine.  And  the 
foundation  of  the  whole,  the  ghost  theory,  is 
exactly  that  theological  speculation  which  is  the 
most  widely  spread  of  all,  and  the  most  deeply 
rooted  among  uncivilised  men.  I  am  able  to  base 
this  statement,  to  some  extent,  on  facts  within  my 
own  knowledge.  In  December  1848,  H.M.S. 
JtattlesnaJce,  the  ship  to  which  I  then  belonged, 
was  anchored  off  Mount  Ernest,  an  island  in 
Torres  Straits.  The  people  were  few  and  well 
disposed  ;  and,  when  a  friend  of  mine  (whom  I 
will  call  B.)  and  I  went  ashore,  we  made  ac- 
quaintance with  an  old  native,  Paouda  by  name. 
In  course  of  time  we  became  quite  intimate  with 
the  old  gentleman,  partly  by  the  rendering  of 
mutual  good  offices,  but  chiefly  because  Paouda 
believed  he  had  discovered  that  B.  was  his  father- 
in-law.  And  his  grounds  for  this  singular  convic- 
tion were  very  remarkable.  We  had  made  a  long 
stay  at  Cape  York  hard  by;  and,  in  accordance 
with  a  theory  which  is  widely  spread  among  the 
Australians,  that  white  men  are  the  reincarnated 
spirits  of  black  men,  B.  wa^  held  to  be  the  ghost, 
or  narJd,  of  a  certain  Mount  Ernest  native,  one 
Antarki,  who  had  lately  died,  on  the  ground  of 
some  real  or  fancied  resemblance  to  the  latter. 
Now  Paouda  had  taken  to  wife  a  daughter  of 
Antarki's,    named   Domani,   and   as   soon    as   B. 


318  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

informed  him  tliat  he  was  the  ghost  of  Antarki, 

Paouda   at  *  once   admitted  the  relationship   and 

acted   upon  it.     For,  as  all  the  women  on   the 

island  had  hidden  away  in  fear  of  the  ship,  and 

we  were  anxious  to  see  what  they  were  like,  B. 

pleaded  pathetically  with  Paouda  that  it  would  be 

very  unkind  not  to  let  him  see  his  daughter  and 

grandchildren.     After  a  good  deal  of  hesitation 

and   the    exaction   of   pledges   of    deep    secrecy, 

Paouda  consented  to  take  B.,  and  myself  as  B.'s 

friend,  to  see  Domani  and  the  three  daughters,  by 

whom  B.  was  received  quite  as  one  of  the  family, 

while  I  was  courteously  welcomed  on  his  account. 

This  scene  made  an  impression  upon  me  which 

is  not  yet  effaced.     It  left  no  question   on   my 

mind  of  the  sincerity  of  the  strange  ghost  theory 

of  these  savages,  and  of  the  influence  which  their 

belief  has  on  their  practical  life.     I  had  it  in  my 

mind,  as  well  as  many  a  like  result  of  subsequent 

anthropological  studies,  when,  in  1869,^  I  wrote  as 

follows : — 

There  are  savages  without  God  in  any  proper  sense  of  the 
word,  but  none  without  ghosts.  And  the  Fetishism,  Ancestor- 
worship,  Hero-worship,  and  Demonology  of  primitive  savages 
are  all,  I  believe,  different  manners  of  expression  of  their  belief 
ill  ghosts,  and  of  the  anthropomorphic  interpretation  of  out-of- 
the-way  events  which  is  its  concomitant.  Witchcraft  and 
sorcery  are  the  practical  expressions  of  these  beliefs  ;  and  they 
stand  in  the  same  relation  to  religious  worship  as  the  simple 
anthropomorphism  of  children  or  savages  does  to  theology. 

^  "  The  Scientific  Aspects  of  Positivism,"  Fortnightly  Bevieio, 
1869,  republished  in  Lay  Sermons. 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF    THEOLOGY  319 

I  do  not  quote  myself  with  any  intention  of 
making  a  claim  to  originality  in  putting  forth  this 
view ;  for  I  have  since  discovered  that  the  same 
conception  is  virtually  contained  in  the  great 
"  Discours  sur  THistoire  Universelle  "  of  Bossuet, 
now  more  than  two  centuries  old  : — 

Le  culte  des  honimes  morts  faisoit  presque  tout  le  fond  de 
ridolatrie  :  presque  tous  les  hommes  saciifioient  aux  manes, 
c'est-a-dire  aux  ames  des  morts.  De  si  anciennes  erreurs  nous 
font  voir  a  la  verite  combien  etoit  ancienne  la  croyance  de 
I'immortalite  de  I'ame,  et  nous  montrent  qu'elle  doit  etre  rangee 
parmi  les  premieres  traditions  du  genre  humain.  Mais  I'lionime, 
qui  gatoit  tout,  en  avoit  etrangement  abuse,  puisqu'elle  le 
portoit  a  sacrifier  aux  morts.  On  alloit  meme  jusqu'k  cet  exces, 
de  leur  sacrifier  des  hommes  vivans  :  on  tuoit  leurs  esclaves,  et 
meme  leurs  femraes,  pour  les  aller  servir  dans  I'autre  monde.^ 

Among  more  modern  writers  J.  G.  Miiller,  in  his 
excellent  "  Geschichte  der  amerikanischen  Urre 
ligionen"  (1855),  clearly  recognises  "gespenster- 
hafter  Geisterglaube "  as  the  foundation  of  all 
savage  and  semi-civilised  theology,  and  I  need  do 
no  more  than  mention  the  important  develop- 
ments of  the  same  view  which  are  to  be  found 
in  Mr.  Tyler's  "Primitive  Culture,"  and  in  the 
writings  of  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  especially  his 
recently -published  "  Ecclesiastical  Institutions."  ^ 

1  (Euvres  de  Bossuet,  ed.  1808,  t.  xxxv.  p.  282. 

2  I  should  like  further  to  add  the  expression  of  my  indebted- 
ness to  two  works  by  Herr  Julius  Lippert,  Der  SeelencuU  in 
seinen  BezicMtngcn  zur  alt-hcbraischcn  Relvjion,  and  Die  Rcli' 
gionen  der  europdisclieii  CuUnrvvlkcr,  both  published  in  1881, 
1  have  found  them  full  of  valuable  suggestions. 


320  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  VTII 

It  is  a  matter  of  fact  that,  whether  we  direct 
our  attention  to  the  older  conditions  of  civihsed 
societies,  in  Japan,  in  China,  in  Hindostan,  in 
Greece,  or  in  Rome,^  we  find,  underlying  all  other 
theological  notions,  the  belief  in  ghosts,  with  its 
inevitable  concomitant  sorcery  ;  and  a  primitive 
cult,  in  the  shape  of  a  worship  of  ancestors,  which 
is  essentially  an  attempt  to  please,  or  appease 
their  ghosts.  The  same  thing  is  true  of  old 
Mexico  and  Peru,  and  of  all  the  semi-civilised  or 
savage  peoples  who  have  developed  a  definite  cult ; 
and  in  those  who,  like  the  natives  of  Australia, 
have  not  even  a  cult,  the  belief  in,  and  fear  of, 
ghosts  is  as  strong  as  anywhere  else.  The  most 
clearly  demonstrable  article  of  the  theology  of  the 
Israelites  in  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries 
B.C.  is  therefore  simply  the  article  which  is  to  be 
found  in  all  primitive  theologies,  namely,  the 
belief  that  a  man  has  a  soul  which  continues  to 
exist  after  death  for  a  longer  or  shorter  time,  and 
may  return,  as  a  ghost,  with  a  divine,  or  at  least 
demonic,  character,  to  influence  for  good  or  evil 
(and  usually  for  evil)  the  affairs  of  the  living. 
But  the  correspondence  between  the  old  Israelitic 
and  other  archaic  forms  of  theology  extends 
to  details.     If,   in  order  to  avoid  all  chance  of 

^  See  among  others  the  remarkable  work  of  Fustel  de 
Coulanges,  La  Cite  antique,  in  which  the  social  importance  of 
the  old  Roman  ancestor-worship  is  brought  out  with  great 
cltarness. 


Vili  THE   EVOLUTION   OF  THEOLOGY  821 

direct  communication,  we  direct  our  attention  to 
the  theology  of  semi-civih'sed  people,  such  as  the 
Polynesian  Islanders,  separated  by  the  greatest 
possible  distance,  and  by  every  conceivable  physical 
barrier,  from  the  inhabitants  of  Palestine,  we 
shall  find  not  merely  that  all  the  features  of  old- 
Israelitic  theology,  which  are  revealed  in  the 
records  cited,  are  found  among  them  ;  but  that 
extant  information  as  to  the  inner  mind  of  these 
people  tends  to  remove  many  of  the  difficulties 
which  those  who  have  not  studied  anthropology 
find  in  the  Hebrew  narrative. 

One  of  the  best  sources,  if  not  the  best  source, 
of  information  on  these  topics  is  Mariner's  Tonga 
Islands,  which  tells  us  of  the  condition  of  Cook's 
"  Friendly  Islanders "  eighty  years  ago,  before 
European  influence  was  sensibly  felt  among  them. 
Mariner,  a  youth  of  fair  education  and  of  no 
inconsiderable  natural  ability  (as  the  work  which 
was  drawn  up  from  the  materials  he  furnished 
shows),  was  about  fifteen  years  of  age  when  his 
ship  was  attacked  and  plundered  by  the  Tongans : 
he  remained  four  years  in  the  islands,  familiarised 
himself  with  the  language,  lived  the  life  of  the 
people,  became  intimate  with  many  of  them,  and 
had  every  opportunity  of  acquainting  himself  with 
their  opinions,  as  well  as  with  their  liabits  and 
customs.  He  seems  to  have  been  devoid  of 
prejudices,  theological  or  other,  and  the  impression 
of  strict   accuracy  which  his  statements  convey 

110 


322  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  viii 

has  been  justified  by  all  the  knowledge  of 
Polynesian  life  which  has  been  subsequently 
acquired. 

It  is  desirable,  therefore,  to  pay  close  attention 
to  that  which  Mariner  tells  ns  about  the  theo- 
logical views  of  these  people  : — 

The  human  soul/  after  its  separation  from  the  body,  is 
termed  a  hotooa  (a  god  or  spirit),  and  is  believed  to  exist  in  the 
shape  of  the  body  ;  to  have  the  same  propensities  as  during  life, 
but  to  be  corrected  by  a  more  enlightened  understanding,  by 
which  it  readily  distinguishes  good  from  evil,  truth  from  false- 
hood, right  from  wrong  ;  having  the  same  attributes  as  the 
original  gods,  but  in  a  minor  degree,  and  having  its  dwelling 
for  ever  in  the  happy  regions  of  Bolotoo,  holding  the  same  rank 
in  regard  to  other  souls  as  during  this  life  ;  it  has,  however, 
the  power  of  returning  to  Tonga  to  inspire  priests,  relations,  or 
others,  or  to  appear  in  dreams  to  those  it  wishes  to  admonish  ; 
and  sometimes  to  the  external  eye  in  the  form  of  a  ghost  or 
apparition  ;  but  this  power  of  reappearance  at  Tonga  par- 
ticularly belongs  to  the  souls  of  chiefs  rather  than  of  matabooles 
(vol.  ii.  p.  130). 

The  word  "  hotooa  "  is  the  same  as  that  which 
is  usually  spelt  "  atua  "  by  Polynesian  philologues, 
and  it  will  be  convenient  to  adopt  this  spelling. 
Now  under  this  head  of  "  Atuas  or  supernatural 
intellio^ent  beinors  "  the  Tonorans  include  : — 

1.  The  original  gods.  2.  The  souls  of  nobles  that  have  all 
attributes  in  common  with  the  first  but  inferior  in  degree. 
3.  The  souls  of  matabooles  ^  that  are  still  inferior,  and  have  not 

1  Supposed  to  be  "  the  finer  or  more  aeriform  part  of  the 
body,"  standing  in  "the  same  relation  to  the  body  as  the 
perfume  and  the  more  essential  qualities  of  a  flower  do  to  the 
more  solid  substances"  (Manner,  vol.  ii.  p.  127). 

*  A  kind  of  "clients "  in  the  Roman  sense. 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  323 

the  power  as  the  two  first  have  of  coming  back  to  Tonga  to 
inspire  tlie  priests,  though  they  are  supposed  to  liave  the  power 
of  appearing  to  their  relatives.  4.  The  original  attendants  or 
servants,  as  it  were,  of  the  gods,  who,  although  they  had  their 
origin  and  have  ever  since  existed  in  Bolotoo,  are  still  inferior 
to  the  third  class.  5.  The  Atua  pow  or  mischievous  gods. 
6.  Mooif  or  the  god  that  supports  the  earth  and  does  not  belong 
to  Bolotoo  (voL  ii.  pp.  103,  104). 

From  this  it  appears  that  the  "  Atuas "  of  the 
Polynesian  are  exactly  equivalent  to  the ''Elohim" 
of  the  old  Israelite.^  They  comprise  everything 
spiritual,  from  a  ghost  to  a  god,  and  from  "  the 
merely  tutelar  gods  to  particular  private  families  " 
(vol.  ii.  p.  104),  to  Tii-li-y-Tooboo,  who  was  the 
national  god  of  Tonga.  The  Tongans  had  no 
doubt  that  these  Atuas  daily  and  hourly  influenced 
their  destinies  and  could,  conversely,  be  influenced 
by  them.  Hence  their  "piety,"  the  incessant 
acts  of  sacrificial  worship  which  occupied  their 
lives,  and  their  belief  in  omens  and  charms. 
Moreover,  the  Atuas  were  believed  to  visit 
particular  persons, — their  own  priests  in  the  case 
of  the  higher  gods,  but  apparently  anybody  in 
that  of  the  lower, — and  to  inspire  them  by  a 
process  which  was  conceived  to  involve  the 
actual  residence  of  the  god,  for  the  time  being,  in 
the  person  inspired,  who  was  thus  rendered 
capable  of  prophesying  (vol.  ii.  p.  100).      For  the 

^  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  Baifji.av  among  the  Greeks,  and 
Deus  among  the  Romans,  had  the  same  wide  signification 
The  dii  manes  were  ghosts  of  ancestors  =  Atuas  of  the  family. 


324      THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THEOLOGY      vm 

Tongan,    therefore,   inspiration    indubitably    was 
possession. 

When  one  of  the  higher  gods  was  invoked, 
through  his  priest,  by  a  chief  who  wished  to 
consult  the  oracle,  or,  in  old  Israelitic  phraseology, 
to  "  inquire  of,"  the  god,  a  hog  was  killed  and 
cooked  over  night,  and,  together  with  plantains, 
yams,  and  the  materials  for  making  the  peculiar 
drink  'kava  (of  which  the  Tongans  were  very  fond), 
was  carried  next  day  to  the  priest.  A  circle,  as 
for  an  ordinary  kava-drinking  entertainment,  was 
then  formed ;  but  the  priest,  as  the  representative 
of  the  god,  took  the  highest  place,  while  the 
chiefs  sat  outside  the  circle,  as  an  expression  of 
humility  calculated  to  please  the  god. 

As  soon  as  they  are. all  seated  the  priest  is  considered  as 
inspired,  the  god  being  supposed  to  exist  within  him  from  that 
moment.  He  remains  for  a  considerable  time  in  silence  with 
his  hands  clasped  before  him,  his  eyes  are  cast  down  and  he 
rests  perfectly  still.  During  the  time  the  victuals  are  being 
shared  out  and  the  kava  preparing,  the  mataboolcs  sometimes 
begin  to  consult  him  ;  sometimes  he  answers,  and  at  other 
times  not ;  in  either  case  he  remains  with  his  eyes  cast  down. 
Frequently  he  will  not  utter  a  word  till  the  repast  is  finished 
and  the  kava  too.  When  he  speaks  he  generally  begins  in  a 
low  and  very  altered  tone  of  voice,  w^hich  gradually  rises  to 
nearly  its  natural  pitch,  though  sometimes  a  little  above  it. 
All  that  he  says  is  supposed  to  be  the  declaration  of  the  god, 
and  he  accordingly  speaks  in  the  first  person,  as  if  he  were  the 
god.  All  this  is  done  generally  without  any  apparent  inward 
emotion  or  outward  agitation ;  but,  on  some  occasions,  his 
countenance  becomes  fierce,  and  as  it  were  infiamed,  and  his 
whole  frame  agitated  with  inward  feeling  ;  he  is  seized  with  an 


VIII  THE    EVOLUTION    OF    THEOLOGY  325 

universal  trembling,  the  perspiration  breaks  out  on  his  fore- 
head, and  his  lips  turning  black  are  convulsed  ;  at  length  tears 
start  in  floods  from  his  eyes,  his  breast  heaves  with  great 
emotion,  and  his  utterance  is  choked.  These  symptoms 
gradually  subside.  Before  this  paroxysm  comes  on,  and  after  it 
is  over,  he  often  eats  as  much  as  four  hungry  men  under  other 
circumstances  could  devour.  The  fit  being  now  gone  off,  he 
remains  for  some  time  calm  and  then  takes  up  a  club  that  is 
placed  by  him  for  the  purpose,  turns  it  over  and  regards  it 
attentively  ;  he  then  looks  up  earnestly,  now  to  the  right,  now 
to  the  left,  and  now  again  at  the  club  ;  afterwards  he  looks  up 
again  and  about  him  in  like  manner,  and  then  again  fixes  his 
eyes  on  the  club,  and  so  on  for  several  times.  At  length  he 
suddenly  raises  the  club,  and,  after  a  moment's  pause,  strikes 
the  ground  or  the  adjacent  part  of  the  house  with  considerable 
force  ;  immediately  the  god  leaves  him,  and  he  rises  up  and 
retires  to  the  back  of  the  ring  among  the  people  (vol,  L  pp. 
100,  101), 

The  phenomena  thus  described,  in  language 
which,  to  any  one  who  is  familiar  with  the  mani- 
festations of  abnormal  mental  states  amongf 
ourselves,  bears  the  stamp  of  fidelity,  furnish  a 
most  instructive  commentary  upon  the  story  of 
the  wise  woman  of  End  or.  As  in  the  latter,  we 
have  the  possession  by  the  spirit  or  soul  (Atua, 
Elohim),  the  strange  voice,  the  speaking  in  the 
first  person.  Unfortunately  nothing  (beyond  the 
loud  cry)  is  mentioned  as  to  the  state  of  the  wise 
woman  of  Endor.  But  what  we  learn  from  other 
sources  {e.g.  1  Sam.  x.  20-24)  respecting  the 
physical  concomitants  of  inspiration  among  the 
old  Israelites  has  its  exact  equivalent  in  this  and 
other    accounts    of  Polynesian   prophetism.     An 


32i3  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

excellent  authority,  Moerenhout,  who  lived  among 
the  people  of  the  Society  Islands  many  years  and 
knew  them  well,  says  that,  in  Tahiti,  the  o^ole  of 
the  prophet  had  very  generally  passed  out  of  the 
hands  of  the  priests  into  that  of  private  persons 
who  professed  to  represent  the  god,  often  assumed 
his  name,  and  in  this  capacity  prophesied.  I  will 
not  run  the  risk  of  weakening  the  force  of 
Moerenhout's  description  of  the  prophetic  state  by 
translating  it : — 

Un  individu,  dans  cet  etat,  avait  le  bras  gauche  enveloppe 
d'un  morceau  d'etoffe,  signe  de  la  presence  de  la  Divinite.  II 
ne  parlait  que  d'un  ton  imperieux  et  vehement.  Ses  attaques, 
quand  il  allait  prophetiser,  etaient  aussi  effroyables  qu'impo- 
santes,  II  tremblait  d'abord  de  tons  ses  membres,  la  figure 
enflee,  les  yeux  hagards,  rouges  et  etincelants  d'une  expression 
sauvage.  II  gesticulait,  articulait  des  mots  vides  de  sens, 
poussait  des  cris  horribles  qui  faisaient  tressaillir  tous  les 
assistants,  et  s'exaltait  parfois  au  point  qu'on  n'osait  pas 
Tapprocher.  Autour  de  lui,  le  silence  de  la  terreur  et  du  re. 
spect.  .  .  .  C'est  alors  qu'il  repondait  aiix  questions, 
annonoait  I'avenir,  le  destin  des  batailles,  la  volonte  des  dieux ; 
et,  chose  etonnante  !  au  sein  de  ce  delire,  de  cet  enthousiasmo 
religieux,  son  langage  etait  grave,  imposant,  son  eloquence 
noble  et  persuasive.^ 

Just  so  Saul  strips  off  his  clothes,  "  prophesies " 
before  Samuel,  and  lies  down  "  naked  all  that  day 
and  night." 

Both  Mariner  and  Moerenhout  refuse  to  have 
recourse  to  the  hypothesis  of  imposture  in  order 
to  account  for  the  inspired  state  of  the  Polynesian 

1  Voyages  aux  tics  du  Grand  Ocean,  t.  i.  p.  482. 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  827 

prophets.  On  the  contrary,  they  fully  believe  in 
their  sincerity.  Mariner  tells  the  story  of  a 
young  chief,  an  acquaintance  of  his,  who  thought 
himself  possessed  by  the  Atua  of  a  dead  woman 
who  had  fallen  in  love  with  him,  and  who  wished 
him  to  die  that  he  might  be  near  her  in  Bolotoo. 
And  he  died  accordingly.  But  the  most  valuable 
evidence  on  this  head  is  contained  in  what  the 
same  authority  says  about  King  Finow's  son. 
The  previous  king,  Toogoo  Ahoo,  had  been 
assassinated  by  Finow,  and  his  soul,  become  an 
Atua  of  divine  rank  in  Bolotoo,  had  been  pleased 
to  visit  and  inspire  Finow's  son — with  what  par- 
ticular object  does  not  appear. 

When  this  young  chief  returned  to  Hapai,  Mr.  Mariner,  who 
was  upon  a  footing  of  great  friendship  with  him,  one  day  asked 
him  how  he  felt  himself  when  the  spirit  of  Toogoo  Ahoo  visited 
him  ;  he  replied  that  he  could  not  well  describe  his  feelings,  but 
the  best  he  could  say  of  it  was,  that  he  felt  himself  all  over  in  a 
glow  of  heat  and  quite  restless  and  uncomfortable,  and  did  not 
feel  his  own  jjersonal  identity,  as  it  were,  but  seemed  to  have  a 
mind  different  from  his  own  natural  mind,  his  thoughts 
wandering  upon  strange  and  unusual  subjects,  though  perfectly 
sensible  of  surrounding  objects.  He  next  asked  him  how  he 
knew  it  was  the  spirit  of  Toogoo  Ahoo  ?  His  answer  was, 
"  There's  a  fool !  How  can  I  tell  you  how  I  knew  it?  I  felt 
and  knew  it  was  so  by  a  kind  of  consciousness  ;  my  mind  told 
me  that  it  was  Toogoo  Ahoo  "  (vol.  i.  pp.  104,  105). 

Finow's  son  was  evidently  made  for  a  theological 
disputant,  and  fell  back  at  once  on  the  inexpug- 
nable stronghold  of  faith  when  other  evidence 
was  lacking.     "  There's  a  fool !  I  know  it  is  true, 


328  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

because  I  know  it,"  is  the  exemplar  and  epitome 
of  the  sceptic-crushing  process  in  other  places 
than  the  Tonga  Islands. 

The  island  of  Bolotoo,  to  which  all  the  souls 
(of  the  upper  classes  at  any  rate)  repair  after  the 
death  of  the  body,  and  from  which  they  return  at 
will  to  interfere,  for  good  or  evil,  with  the  lives  of 
those  whom  they  have  left  behind,  obviously 
answers  to  Sheol.  In  Tongan  tradition,  this  place 
of  souls  is  a  sort  of  elysium  above  ground  and 
pleasant  enough  to  live  in.  But,  in  other  parts  of 
Polynesia,  the  corresponding  locality,  which  is 
called  Po,  has  to  be  reached  by  descending  into 
the  earth,  and  is  represented  dark  and  gloomy 
like  Sheol.  But  it  was  not  looked  upon  as  a  place 
of  rewards  and  punishments  in  any  sense. 
Whether  in  Bolotoo  or  in  Po,  the  soul  took  the 
rank  it  had  in  the  flesh ;  and,  a  shadow,  lived 
amongf  the  shadows  of  the  friends  and  houses  and 
food  of  its  previous  life. 

The  Tongan  theologians  recognised  several 
hundred  gods  ;  but  there  was  one,  already  men- 
tioned as  their  national  god,  whom  they  regarded 
as  far  greater  than  any  of  the  others,  "  as  a  great 
chief  from  the  top  of  the  sky  down  to  the  bottom 
of  the  earth  "  (Mariner,  vol.  ii.  p.  106).  He  was 
also  god  of  war,  and  the  tutelar  deity  of  the  royal 
family,  whoever  happened  to  be  the  incumbent  of 
the  royal  office  for  the  time  being.  He  had  no 
priest  except  the  king  himself,  and  his  visits,  even 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  329 

to  royalty,  were  few  and  far  between.  The  name 
of  this  supreme  deity  was  Ta-li-y-Tooboo,  the 
literal  meaning  of  which  is  said  to  be  "  Wait  there, 
Tooboo,"  from  which  it  would  appear  that  the 
peculiar  characteristic  of  Ta-li-y-Toobo6,  in  the 
eyes  of  his  worshippers,  was  persistence  of  duration. 
And  it  is  curious  to  notice,  in  relation  to  this 
circumstance,  that  many  Hebrew  philologers  have 
thought  the  meaning  of  Jahveh  to  be  best 
expressed  by  the  word  "  Eternal."  It  would 
probably  be  difficult  to  express  the  notion  of  an 
eternal  being,  in  a  dialect  so  little  fitted  to  convey 
abstract  conceptions  as  Tongan,  better  than  by 
that  of  one  who  always  "  waits  there." 

The  characteristics  of  the  gods  in  Tongan 
theology  are  exactly  those  of  men  whose  shape 
they  are  supposed  to  possess,  only  they  have  more 
intelligence  and  greater  power.  The  Tongan 
belief  that,  after  death,  the  human  Atua  more 
readily  distinguishes  good  from  evil,  runs  parallel 
with  the  old  Israelitic  conception  of  Elohim  ex- 
pressed in  Genesis,  "  Ye  shall  be  as  Elohim, 
knowing  good  from  evil."  They  further  agreed 
with  the  old  Israelites,  that  "  all  rewards  for 
virtue  and  punishments  for  vice  happen  to  men 
in  this  world  only,  and  come  immediately  from 
the  gods"  (vol.  ii.  p.  100).  Moreover,  they  were 
of  opinion  that  though  the  gods  approve  of  some 
kinds  of  virtue,  are  displeased  with  some  kinds 
of  vice,  and,  to  a  certain  extent,  protect  or  forsake 


830  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vm 

their  worshippers  according  to  their  moral  con- 
duct, yet  neglect  to  pay  due  respect  to  the 
deities,  and  forgetfulness  to  keep  them  in  good 
humour,  might  be  visited  with  even  worse  conse- 
quences than  moral  delinquency.  And  those  who 
will  carefully  study  the  so-called  "  Mosaic  code  '* 
contained  in  the  books  of  Exodus,  Leviticus,  and 
Numbers,  will  see  that,  though  Jahveh's  prohi- 
bitions of  certain  forms  of  immorality  are  strict 
and  sweeping,  his  wrath  is  quite  as  strongly 
kindled  against  infractions  of  ritual  ordinances. 
Accidental  homicide  may  go  unpunished,  and 
reparation  may  be  made  for  wilful  theft.  On  the 
other  hand,  Nadab  and  Abihu,  who  "  offered  strange 
fire  before  Jahveh,  which  he  had  not  com- 
manded them,"  were  swiftly  devoured  by  Jahveh's 
fire ;  he  who  sacrificed  anywhere  except  at  the 
allotted  place  was  to  be  "  cut  off  from  his  people  "  ; 
so  was  he  who  eat  blood ;  and  the  details  of  the 
upholstery  of  the  Tabernacle,  of  the  millinery  of 
the  priests'  vestments,  and  of  the  cabinet  work  of 
the  ark,  can  plead  direct  authority  from  Jahveh, 
no  less  than  moral  commands. 

Amongst  the  Tongans,  the  sacrifices  were 
regarded  as  gifts  of  food  and  drink  offered  to  the 
divine  Atuas,  just  as  the  articles  deposited  by  the 
graves  of  the  recently  dead  were  meant  as  food 
for  Atuas  of  lower  rank.  A  kava  root  was  a 
constant  form  of  offering  all  over  Polynesia.  In 
the   excellent   work  of  the  Rev.  George  Turner, 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  331 

entitled    Nineteen    Years   in   Polynesia    (p.    241), 

I  find  it  said  of  the  Samoans  (near  neiglibours  of 

the  Tongans)  : — 

The  offerings  were  principally  cooked  food.  As  in  ancient 
Greece  so  in  Samoa,  the  first  cup  was  in  honour  of  the  god.  It 
was  either  poured  out  on  the  ground  or  waved  towards  the 
heavens,  reminding  us  again  of  the  Mosaic  ceremonies.  The 
chiefs  all  drank  a  portion  out  of  the  same  cup,  according  to 
rank  ;  and  after  that,  the  food  brought  as  an  offering  was 
divided  and  eaten  "  there  before  the  Lord." 

In  Tonga,  when  they  consulted  a  god  who  had 
a  priest,  the  latter,  as  representative  of  the  god, 
had  the  first  cup  ;  but  if  the  god,  like  Ta-li-y-Too- 
boo,  had  no  priest,  then  the  chief  place  was  left 
vacant,  and  was  supposed  to  be  occupied  by  the 
god  himself.  When  the  first  cup  of  kava  was 
filled,  the  mataboole  who  acted  as  master  of  the 
ceremonies  said,  "  Give  it  to  your  god,"  and  it  was 
offered,  though  only  as  a  matter  of  form.  In 
Tonga  and  Samoa  there  were  many  sacred  places 
or  morais,  with  houses  of  the  ordinary  con- 
struction, but  which  served  as  temples  in 
consequence  of  being  dedicated  to  various  gods  ; 
and  there  were  altars  on  which  the  sacrifices  were 
offered  ;  nevertheless  there  were  few  or  no  images. 
Mariner  mentions  none  in  Tonga,  and  the  Samoans 
seem  to  have  been  regarded  as  no  better  than 
atheists  by  other  Polynesians  because  they  had 
none.  It  does  not  appear  that  either  of  these 
peoples  had  images  even  of  their  family  or  ancestral 
sods. 


332  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

In  Tahiti  and  the  adjacent  islands,  Moerenhout 
(t.  i.  p.  471)  makes  the  very  interesting  obser- 
vation, not  only  that  idols  were  often  absent,  but 
that,  where  they  existed,  the  images  of  the  gods 
served  merely  as  depositories  for  the  proper 
representatives  of  the  divinity.  Each  of  these 
was  called  a  maro  aurou,  and  was  a  kind  of  girdle 
artistically  adorned  with  red,  yellow,  blue,  and 
black  feathers — the  red  feathers  being  especially 
important — which  were  consecrated  and  kept  as 
sacred  objects  within  the  idols.  They  were  worn 
by  great  personages  on  solemn  occasions,  and  con- 
ferred upon  their  wearers  a  sacred  and  almost 
divine  character.  There  is  no  distinct  evidence 
that  the  maro  aurou  was  supposed  to  have  any 
special  efficacy  in  divination,  but  one  cannot  fail  to 
see  a  certain  parallelism  between  this  holy  girdle, 
which  endowed  its  wearer  with  a  particular 
sanctity,  and  the  ephod. 

According  to  the  Rev.  R.  Taylor,  the  New 
Zealanders  formerly  used  the  word  karahia  (now 
employed  for  "  prayer  ")  to  signify  a  "  spell,  charm, 
or  incantation,"  and  the  utterance  of  these  karakias 
constituted  the  chief  part  of  their  cult.  In  the 
south,  the  officiating  priest  had  a  small  image, 
"about  eighteen  inches  long,  resembling  a  peg 
with  a  carved  head,"  which  reminds  one  of  the 
form  commonly  attributed  to  the  teraphim. 

The  priest  first  bandaged  a  fillet  of  red  parrot  feathers  under 
the  god's   chin,  which   was  called  his  pahau   or  beard  ;  this 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  333 

bandage  was  made  of  a  certain  kind  of  sennet,  which  was  tied 
on  in  a  peculiar  way.  When  this  was  done  it  was  taken 
possession  of  by  the  Atua,  whose  spirit  entered  it.  The  priest 
then  either  held  it  in  the  hand  and  vibrated  it  in  the  air, 
whilst  the  powerful  karakia  was  repeated,  or  he  tied  a  piece  of 
string  (formed  of  the  centre  of  a  flax  leaf)  round  the  neck  of  the 
image  and  stuck  it  in  the  ground.  He  sat  at  a  little  distance 
from  it,  leaning  against  a  tuahu,  a  short  stone  pillar  stuck  in 
the  ground  in  a  slanting  position  and,  holding  the  string  in  his 
hand,  he  gave  the  god  a  jerk  to  arrest  his  attention,  lest  he 
should  be  otherwise  engaged,  like  Baal  of  old,  either  hunting, 
fishing,  or  sleeping,  and  therefore  must  be  awaked.  .  .  . 
The  god  is  supposed  to  make  use  of  the  priest's  tongue  in 
giving  a  reply.  Image-worship  appears  to  have  been  confined 
to  one  part  of  the  island.  The  Atua  was  supposed  only  to 
enter  the  image  for  the  occasion.  The  natives  declare  they  did 
not  worship  the  image  itself,  but  only  the  Atua  it  represented, 
and  that  the  image  was  merely  used  as  a  way  of  approaching 
him.i 

This  is  the  excuse  for  image-worship  which  the 
more  intelligent  idolaters  make  all  the  world  over  ; 
but  it  is  more  interesting  to  observe  that,  in  the 
present  case,  we  seem  to  have  the  equivalents  of 
divination  by  teraphim,  with  the  aid  of  something 
like  an  ephod  (which,  however,  is  used  to  sanctify 
the  image  and  not  the  priest)  mixed  up  together. 
Many  H  ebrew  archaeologists  have  supposed  that  the 
term  "  ephod "  is  sometimes  used  for  an  image 
(particularly  in  the  case  of  Gideon's  ephod),  and 
the  story  of  Micah,  in  the  book  of  Judges,  shows 
that  images  were,  at  any  rate,  employed  in  close 
association  with  the  ephod.     If  the  pulling  of  the 

^   Te  Ika  a  Maui :  New  Zealand  and  its  Inhabitants,  p.  72. 


334  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

string  to  call  the  attention  of  the  god  seems  as 
absurd  to  us  as  it  appears  to  have  done  to  the 
worthy  missionary,  who  tells  us  of  the  practice,  it 
should  be  recollected  that  the  high  priest  of  Jahveh 
was  ordered  to  wear  a  garment  fringed  with  golden 
bells. 

And  it  shall  be  upon  Aaron  to  minister  ;  and  the  sound 
thereof  shall  be  heard  when  he  goeth  in  unto  the  holy  place 
before  Jahveh,  and  when  he  cometh  out,  that  he  die  not 
(Exod.  xxviii.  35). 

An  escape  from  the  obvious  conclusion  suggested 
by  this  passage  has  been  sought  in  the  supposition 
that  these  bells  rang  for  the  sake  of  the  wor- 
shippers, as  at  the  elevation  of  the  host  in  the 
Roman  Catholic  ritual ;  but  then  why  should  the 
priest  be  threatened  with  the  well-known  penalty 
for  inadvisedly  beholding  the  divinity  ? 

In  truth,  the  intermediate  step  between  the 
Maori  practice  and  that  of  the  old  Israelites  is 
furnished  by  the  Kami  temples  in  Japan.  These 
are  provided  with  bells  which  the  worshippers  who 
present  themselves  ring,  in  order  to  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  ancestor-god  to  their  presence.  Grant 
the  fundamental  assumption  of  the  essentially 
human  character  of  the  spirit,  whether  Atua, 
Kami,  or  Elohim,  and  all  these  practices  are  equally 
rational. 

The  sacrifices  to  the  gods  in  Tonga,  and  else- 
where in  Polynesia,  were  ordinarily  social  gatherings, 
in  which  the  god,  either  in  his  own  person  or  in 


vra  THE   EVOLUTION    OF   THEOLOGY  335 

that  of  his  priestly  representative,  was  supposed  to 
take  part.  These  sacrifices  were  offered  on  every 
occasion  of  importance,  and  even  the  daily  meals 
were  prefaced  by  oblations  and  libations  of  food 
and  drink,  exactly  answering  to  those  offered  by 
the  old  Romans  to  their  manes,  penates,  and  lares. 
The  sacrifices  had  no  moral  significance,  but  were 
the  necessary  result  of  the  theory  that  the  god 
was  either  a  deified  ghost  of  an  ancestor  or  chief, 
or,  at  any  rate,  a  being  of  like  nature  to  these.  If 
one  wanted  to  get  anything  out  of  him,  therefore, 
the  first  step  was  to  put  him  in  good  humour  by 
gifts ;  and  if  one  desired  to  escape  his  wrath,  which 
might  be  excited  by  the  most  trifling  neglect  or 
unintentional  disrespect,  the  great  thing  was  to 
pacify  him  by  costly  presents.  King  Finow 
appears  to  have  been  somewhat  of  a  freethinker  (to 
the  great  hoiTor  of  his  subjects),  and  it  was  only 
his  untimely  death  which  prevented  him  from 
dealing  with  the  priest  of  a  god,  who  had  not 
returned  a  favourable  answer  to  his  supplications, 
as  Saul  dealt  with  the  priests  of  the  sanctuary  of 
Jahveh  at  Nob.  Nevertheless,  Finow  showed  his 
practical  belief  in  the  gods  during  the  sickness  of 
a  daughter,  to  whom  he  was  fondly  attached,  in  a 
fashion  which  has  a  close  parallel  in  the  history  of 
Israel. 

If  the  gods  have  any  resentment  against  us,  let  the  whole 
weight  of  vengeance  fall  on  my  head.  I  fear  not  their  ven- 
geance— but  spare  my  cMld  ;  and  I  earnestly  entreat  you,  Toobo 


836  THE   EVOLUTION   OF  THEOLOGY  viil 

Total  [the  god  whom  he  had  evoked],  to  exert  all  your  in- 
fluence with  the  other  gods  that  I  alone  may  suffer  all  the 
punishment  they  desire  to  inflict  (vol.  i.  p.  354). 

So  when  the  king  of  Israel  has  sinned  by 
"  numbering  the  people,"  and  they  are  punished 
for  his  fault  by  a  pestilence  which  slays  seventy 
thousand  innocent  men,  David  cries  to  Jah- 
veh : — 

Lo,  I  have  sinned,  and  I  have  done  perversely  :  but  these 
sheep,  what  have  they  done  ?  let  thine  hand,  I  pray  thee,  be 
against  me,  and  against  my  father's  house  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  17). 

Human  sacrifices  were  extremely  common  in 
Polynesia ;  and,  in  Tonga,  the  "  devotion "  of  a 
child  by  strangling  was  a  favourite  method  of 
averting  the  wrath  of  the  gods.  The  well-known 
instances  of  Jephthah's  sacrifice  of  his  daughter 
and  of  David's  giving  up  the  seven  sons  of  Saul  to 
be  sacrificed  by  the  Gibeonites  "  before  Jahveh," 
appear  to  me  to  leave  no  doubt  that  the  old 
Israelites,  even  when  devout  worshippers  of 
Jahveh,  considered  human  sacrifices,  under  certain 
circumstances,  to  be  not  only  permissible  but 
laudable.  Samuel's  hewing  to  pieces  of  the 
miserable  captive,  sole  survivor  of  his  nation, 
Agag,  "  before  Jahveh,"  can  hardly  be  viewed  in 
any  other  light.  The  life  of  Moses  is  redeemed 
from  Jahveh,  who  "  sought  to  slay  him,"  by 
Zipporah's  symbolical  sacrifice  of  her  child,  by  the 
bloody  operation  of  circumcision.  Jahveh  expressly 
affirms  that  the  first-born  males  of  men  and  beasts 


Vni      THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THEOLOGY     337 

are  devoted  to  him;  in  accordance  with  that 
claim,  the  first-born  males  of  the  beasts  are  duly 
sacrificed ;  and  it  is  only  by  special  permission 
that  the  claim  to  the  first-born  of  men  is  waived, 
and  it  is  enacted  that  they  may  be  redeemed 
(Exod.  xiii.  12-15).  Is  it  possible  to  avoid  the 
conclusion  that  immolation  of  their  first-born  sons 
would  have  been  incumbent  on  the  worshippers  of 
Jahveh,  had  they  not  been  thus  specially  excused  ? 
Can  any  other  conclusion  be  drawn  from  the 
history  of  Abraham  and  Isaac  ?  Does  Abraham 
exhibit  any  indication  of  surprise  when  he  receives 
the  astounding  order  to  sacrifice  his  son  ?  Is  there 
the  slightest  evidence  that  there  was  anything  in 
his  intimate  and  personal  acquaintance  with  the 
character  of  the  Deity,  who  had  eaten  the  meat 
and  drunk  the  milk  which  Abraham  set  before  him 
under  the  oaks  of  Mamre,  to  lead  him  to  hesitate 
— even  to  wait  twelve  or  fourteen  hours  for  a 
repetition  of  the  command  ?  Not  a  whit.  We 
are  told  that  "Abraham  rose  early  in  the  morn- 
ing" and  led  his  only  child  to  the  slaughter,  as  if 
it  were  the  most  ordinary  business  imaginable. 
Whether  the  story  has  any  historical  foundation  or 
not,  it  is  valuable  as  showing  that  the  writer  of  it 
conceived  Jahveh  as  a  deity  whose  requirement  of 
such  a  sacrifice  need  excite  neither  astonishment 
nor  suspicion  of  mistake  on  the  part  of  his  devotee. 
Hence,  when  the  incessant  human  sacrifices  in 
Israel,  during  the  age  of  the  kings,  are  pat  down 
111 


338  THE  EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  viii 

to  the  influence  of  foreign  idolatries,  we  may  fairly 
inquire  whether  editorial  Bowdlerising  has  not 
prevailed  over  historical  truth. 

An  attempt  to  compare  the  ethical  standards 
of  two  nations,  one  of  which  has  a  written  code, 
while  the  other  has  not,  is  beset  with  difficulties. 
With  all  that  is  strange  and,  in  many  cases,  repul- 
sive to  us  in  the  social  arrangements  and  opinions 
respecting  moral  obligation  among  the  Tongans, 
as  they  are  placed  before  us,  with  perfect  candour, 
in  Mariner's  account,  there  is  much  that  indicates 
a  strong  ethical  sense.  They  showed  great  kindli- 
ness to  one  another,  and  faithfulness  in  standing 
by  their  comrades  in  war.  No  people  could  have 
better  observed  either  the  third  or  the  fifth  com- 
mandment ;  for  they  had  a  particular  horror  of 
blasphemy,  and  their  respectful  tenderness  to- 
wards their  parents  and,  indeed,  towards  old  people 
in  general,  was  remarkable. 

It  cannot  be  said  that  the  eighth  commandment 
was  generally  observed,  especially  where  Euro- 
peans were  concerned ;  nevertheless  a  well-bred 
Tongan  looked  upon  theft  as  a  meanness  to  which 
he  would  not  condescend.  As  to  the  seventh  com- 
mandment, any  breach  of  it  was  considered 
scandalous  in  women  and  as  something  to  be 
avoided  in  self-respecting  men ;  but,  among  un- 
married and  widowed  people,  chastity  was  held 
very  cheap.  Nevertheless  the  women  were 
extremely  well  treated,  and  often  showed  them- 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGT  389 

selves  capable  of  great  devotion  and  entire  faith- 
fulness. In  the  matter  of  cruelty,  treachery,  and 
bloodthirstiness,  these  islanders  were  neither 
better  nor  v/orse  than  most  peoples  of  antiquity. 
It  is  to  the  credit  of  the  Tongans  that  they 
particularly  objected  to  slander ;  nor  can  covetous- 
ness  be  regarded  as  their  characteristic ;  for  Mariner 
says  : — 

When  any  one  is  about  to  eat,  he  always  shares  out  what  he 
has  to  those  about  him,  without  any  hesitation,  and  a  contrary 
conduct  would  be  considered  exceedingly  vile  and  selfish  (vol. 

ii.  p.  145). 

In  fact,  they  thought  very  badly  of  the  English 
when  Mariner  told  them  that  his  countrymen  did 
not  act  exactly  on  that  princijDle.  It  further 
appears  that  they  decidedly  belonged  to  the  school 
of  intuitive  moral  philosophers,  and  believed  that 
virtue  is  its  own  reward  ;  for 

Many  of  the  chiefs,  on  being  asked  by  Mr.  Mariner  what 
motives  they  had  for  conducting  themselves  with  propriety, 
besides  the  fear  of  misfortunes  in  this  life,  replied,  the  agreeable 
and  happy  feeling  which  a  man  experiences  within  himself 
when  he  does  any  good  action  or  conducts  himself  nobly  and 
generously  as  a  man  ought  to  do  ;  and  this  question  they 
answered  as  if  they  wondered  such  a  question  should  be  asked 
(vol.  ii.  p.  161). 

One  may  read  from  the  beginning  of  the  book 
of  Judges  to  the  end  of  the  books  of  Samuel  with- 
out discovering  that  the  old  Israelites  had  a  moral 
standard  which  differs,  in  any   essential   respect 


340  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

(except  perhaps  in  regard  to  the  chastity  of  un- 
married women),  from  that  of  the  Tongans. 
Gideon,  Jephthah,  Samson,  and  David  are  strong- 
handed  men,  some  of  whom  are  not  outdone  by 
any  Polynesian  chieftain  in  the  matter  of  murder 
and  treachery;  while  Deborah's  jubilation  over 
Jael's  violation  of  the  primary  duty  of  hospitality, 
proffered  and  accepted  under  circumstances  which 
give  a  peculiarly  atrocious  character  to  the  murder 
of  the  guest ;  and  her  witch-like  gloating  over  the 
picture  of  the  disappointment  of  the  mother  of 
the  victim — 

The  mother  of  Sisera  cried  through  the  lattice, 
Why  is  his  chariot  so  long  in  coming  ?  (Jud.  v.  28. ) 

— would  not  have  been  out  of  place  in  the  choral 
service  of  the  most  sanguinary  god  in  the  Polynesian 
pantheon. 

With  respect  to  the  cannibalism  which  the 
Tongans  occasionally  practised.  Mariner  says  : — 

Altliough  a  few  yonng  ferocious  warriors  chose  to  imitate 
what  they  considered  a  mark  of  courageous  fierceness  in  a  neigh- 
bouring nation,  it  was  held  in  disgust  by  everybody  else  (vol. 
ii.  p.  171). 

That  the  moral  standard  of  Tongan  life  was 
less  elevated  than  that  indicated  in  the  "  Book  of 
the  Covenant "  (Exod.  xxi.-xxiii.)  may  be  freely 
admitted.  But  then  the  evidence  that  this  Book 
of  the  Covenant,  and  even  the  ten  commandments 
as  given  in  Exodus,  were  known  to  the  Israelites 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF  THEOLOGY  341 

of  the  time  of  Samuel  and  Saul,  is  (to  say  the 
least)  by  no  means  conclusive.  The  Deuteronomic 
version  of  the  fourth  commandment  is  hopelessly 
discrepant  from  that  which  stands  in  Exodus. 
Would  any  later  writer  have  ventured  to  alter  the 
commandments  as  given  from  Sinai,  if  he  had  had 
before  him  that  which  professed  to  be  an  accurate 
statement  of  the  "ten  words"  in  Exodus?  And 
if  the  writer  of  Deuteronomy  had  not  Exodus 
before  him,  what  is  the  value  of  the  claim  of  the 
version  of  the  ten  commandments  therein  contained 
to  authenticity  ?  From  one  end  to  the  other  of  the 
books  of  Judges  and  Samuel,  the  only  "  command- 
ments of  Jahveh  "  which  are  specially  adduced  refer 
to  the  prohibition  of  the  worship  of  other  gods,  or 
are  orders  given  ad  hoc,  and  have  nothing  to  do 
with  questions  of  morality. 

In  Polynesia,  the  belief  in  witchcraft,  in  the 
appearance  of  spiritual  beings  in  dreams,  in  pos- 
session as  the  cause  of  diseases,  and  in  omens, 
prevailed  universally.  Mariner  tells  a  story  of  a 
woman  of  rank  who  was  greatly  attached  to  King 
Finow,  and  who,  for  the  space  of  six  months  after 
his  death,  scarcely  ever  slept  elsewhere  than  on 
his  grave,  which  she  kept  carefully  decorated  with 
flowers  : — 

One  day  she  went,  with  the  deepest  affliction,  to  the  house  of 
Mo-oonga  Toob6,  the  widow  of  the  deceased  chief,  to  com- 
municate what  had  happened  to  her  at  the  fytoca  [grave]  dur- 
ing several  nights,  and  which  caused  her  the  greatest  anxiety. 


842  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

She  related  that  she  had  dreamed  that  the  late  How  [King] 
appeared  to  her  and,  with  a  countenance  full  of  disappointment, 
asked  why  there  yet  remained  at  Vavaoo  so  many  evil-designing 
persons  :  for  he  declared  that,  since  he  had  been  at  Bolotoo,  his 
spirit  had  been  disturbed  ^  by  the  evil  machinations  of  wicked 
men  conspiring  against  his  son  ;  but  he  declared  that  ' '  the 
youth "  should  not  be  molested  nor  his  power  shaken  by  the 
spirit  of  rebellion  ;  that  he  therefore  came  to  her  Avith  a  warning 
voice  to  prevent  such  disastrous  consequences  (vol.  i.  p.  424). 

On  inquiry  it  turned  out  that  the  charm  of 
tattao  had  been  j)erformed  on  Finow's  grave,  with 
the  view  of  injuring  his  son,  the  reigning  king, 
and  it  is  to  be  presumed  that  it  was  this  sorcerer's 
work  wliich  had  "  disturbed  "  Finow's  spirit.  The 
Rev.  Richard  Taylor  says  in  the  work  already 
cited  :  "  The  account  given  of  the  witch  of  Endor 
agrees  most  remarkably  with  the  witches  of  New 
Zealand"  (p.  45). 

The  Tongans  also  believed  in  a  mode  of  divin- 
ation (essentially  similar  to  the  casting  of  lots) 
the  twirling  of  a  cocoanut. 

The  object  of  inquiry  ...  is  chiefly  whether  a  sick  person 
will  recover  ;  for  this  purpose  the  nut  being  placed  on  the 
ground,  a  relation  of  the  sick  person  determines  that,  if  the  nut, 
when  again  at  rest,  points  to  such  a  quarter,  the  east  for 
example,  that  the  sick  man  will  recover ;  he  then  prays  aloud 
to  the  patron  god  of  the  family  that  he  will  be  pleased  to  direct 
the  nut  so  that  it  may  indicate  the  truth  ;  the  nut  being  next 
spun,  the  result  is  attended  to  with  contidence,  at  least  with  a 
full  conviction  that  it  will  truly  declare  the  intentions  of  the 
gods  at  the  time  (vol.  ii.  p.  227). 

^  Compare  :  "And  Samuel  said  unto  Saul,  Why  hast  thou  dis- 
quieted me  ]"  (1  Sam.  xxviii.  15.) 


vm  THE  EVOLUTION  OF   THEOLOGY  343 

Does  not  the  action  of  Saul,  on  a  famous  occasion, 
involve  exactly  the  same  theological  presuppo- 
sitions ? 

Therefore  Saul  said  imto  Jaliveh,  the  Elohim  of  Israel,  Shew 
the  right.  And  Jonathan  and  Saul  were  taken  by  lot :  but  the 
people  escaped.  And  Saul  said,  Cast  lots  between  me  and 
Jonathan  my  son.  And  Jonathan  was  taken.  And  Saul  said 
to  Jonathan,  Tell  me  what  thou  liast  done.  ,  .  .  And  the  people 
rescued  Jonathan  so  that  he  died  not  (1  Sam.  xiv.  41-45). 

As  the  Israelites  had  great  yearly  feasts,  so  had 
the  Polynesians;  as  the  Israelites  practised  cir- 
cumcision, so  did  many  Polynesian  people ;  as  the 
Israelites  had  a  complex  and  often  arbitrary- 
seeming  multitude  of  distinctions  between  clean 
and  unclean  things,  and  clean  and  unclean  states 
of  men,  to  which  they  attached  great  importance^ 
so  had  the  Polynesians  their  notions  of  ceremonial 
purity  and  their  tabu,  an  equally  extensive  and 
strange  system  of  prohibitions,  violation  of  which 
was  visited  by  death.  These  doctrines  of  cleanness 
and  uncleanness  no  doubt  may  have  taken  their 
rise  in  the  real  or  fancied  utility  of  the  prescrip- 
tions, but  it  is  probable  that  the  origin  of  many  is 
indicated  in  the  curious  habit  of  the  Samoans  to 
make  fetishes  of  living  animals.  It  will  be 
recollected  that  these  people  had  no  "gods  made 
with  hands,"  but  they  substituted  animals  for 
them. 

At  his  birth 

every  Samoan  was  supposed  to  be  taken  under  the  care  of  some 
tutelary  god  or  aitu  [  =  Atua]  as  it  was  called.     The  help  of 


344      THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THEOLOGY     vyi 

perhaps  half  a  dozen  difFerent  gods  was  invoked  in  succession  on 
the  occasion,  but  the  one  who  happened  to  be  addressed  just  as 
the  child  was  born  was  marked  and  declared  to  be  the  child's 
god  for  life. 

These  gods  were  supposed  to  appear  in  some  visible  incarna- 
tion, and  the  particular  thing  in  which  his  god  was  in  the  habit 
of  appearing  was,  to  the  Samoan,  an  object  of  veneration.  It 
was  in  fact  his  idol,  and  he  was  careful  never  to  injure  it  or 
treat  it  with  contempt.  One,  for  instance,  saw  his  god  in  the 
eel,  another  in  the  shark,  another  in  the  turtle,  another  in  the 
dog,  another  in  the  owl,  another  in  the  lizard  ;  and  so  on, 
throughout  all  the  fish  of  the  sea  and  birds  and  four-footed 
beasts  and  creeping  things.  In  some  of  the  shell-fish  even, 
gods  were  sup[tosed  to  be  present.  A  man  would  eat  freely  of 
what  was  regarded  as  the  incarnation  of  the  god  of  another  man, 
but  the  incarnation  of  his  own  particular  god  he  would  consider 
it  death  to  injure  or  eat.  ^ 

We  have  here  that  which  appears  to  be  the 
origin,  or  one  of  the  origins,  of  food  prohibitions, 
on  the  one  hand,  and  of  totemism  on  the  other. 
When  it  is  remembered  that  the  old  IsraeHtes 
sprang  from  ancestors  who  are  said  to  have  resided 
near,  or  in,  one  of  the  great  seats  of  ancient 
Babylonian  civilisation,  the  city  of  Ur  ;  that  they 
had  been,  it  is  said  for  centuries,  in  close  contact 
with  the  Egyptians ;  and  that,  in  the  theology  of 
both  the  Babylonians  and  the  Egyptians,  there  is 
abundant  evidence,  notwithstanding  their  advanced 
social  organisation,  of  the  belief  in  spirits,  with 
sorcery,  ancestor- worship,  the  deification  of  animals, 
and  the  converse  animalisation  of  gods — it  ob- 
viously needs  very  strong  evidence  to  justify  the 
^  Turner  Nineteen  Years  in  Polynesia,  p.  238. 


VIII  THE  EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  345 

belief  that  the  rude  tribes  of  Israel  did  not  share 
the  notions  from  which  their  far  more  civilised 
neighbours  had  not  emancipated  themselves. 

But  it  is  surely  needless  to  carry  the  comparison 
further.  Out  of  the  abundant  evidence  at  com- 
mand, I  think  that  sufficient  has  been  produced 
to  furnish  ample  grounds  for  the  belief,  that  the 
old  Israelites  of  the  time  of  Samuel  entertained 
theological  conceptions  which  were  on  a  level  with 
those  current  among  the  more  civilised  of  the 
Polynesian  islanders,  though  their  ethical  code 
may  possibly,  in  some  respects,  have  been  more 
advanced.^ 

A  theological  system  of  essentially  similar  char- 
acter, exhibiting  the  same  fundamental  conceptions 
respecting  the  continued  existence  and  incessant 
interference  in  human  affairs  of  disembodied 
spirits,  prevails,  or  formerly  prevailed,  among  the 
whole  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  Polynesian  and 
Melanesian  islands,  and  among  the  people  of 
Australia,  notwithstanding  the  wide  differences  in 
physical  character  and  in  grade  of  civilisation  which 
obtain  among  them.  And  the  same  proposition  is 
true  of  the  people  who  inhabit  the  riverain  shores 
of  the  Pacific  Ocean,  whether  Dyaks,  Malays, 
Indo-Chinese,  Chinese,  Japanese,  the  wild  tribes 
of  America,  or  the  highly  civilised  old  Mexicans 
and  Peruvians.     It  is  no  less  true  of  the  Mongolia 

^  See  Lippert's  excellent  remarks  on  this  subject,  Der  Seelen- 
cult,  p.  89. 


346  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

nomads  of  Northern  Asia,  of  the  Asiatic  Aryans 
and  of  the  Ancient  Greeks  and  Romans,  and  it 
holds  good  among  the  Dravidians  of  the  .Dekhan 
and  the  negro  tribes  of  Africa.  No  tribe  of 
savages,  which  has  yet  been  discovered,  has  been 
conclusively  proved  to  have  so  poor  a  theological 
equipment  as  to  be  devoid  of  a  belief  in  ghosts, 
and  in  the  utility  of  some  form  of  witchcraft,  in 
influencing  those  ghosts.  And  there  is  no  nation, 
modern  or  ancient,  which,  even  at  this  moment, 
has  wholly  given  up  the  belief;  and  in  which  it 
has  not,  at  one  time  or  other,  played  a  great  part 
in  practical  life. 

This  sciotheism}  as  it  might  be  called,  is  found, 
in  several  degrees  of  complexity,  in  rough  corre- 
spondence with  the  stages  of  social  organisation, 
and,  like  these,  separated  by  no  sudden  breaks. 

In  its  simplest  condition,  such  as  may  be  met 
with  among  the  Australian  savages,  theology  is  a 
mere  belief  in  the  existence,  powers,  and  disposi- 
tion (usually  malignant)  of  ghostlike  entities  who 
may  be  propitiated  or  scared  away;  but  no  cult 
can  properly  be  said  to  exist.  And,  in  this  stage, 
theology  is  wholly  independent  of  ethics.  The 
moral  code,  such  as  is  implied  by  public  opinion, 
derives  no  sanction  from  the  theological  dogmas. 


1  Sciography  has  the  authority  of  Cudworth,  Intellectual 
System,  vol.  ii.  p.  836,  Scioniancy  {(TKiofiavrda),  which,  in  the 
sense  of  divination  by  ghosts,  may  be  found  in  Bailey's 
Dictiotmry  (1751),  also  furnishes  a  precedent  for  my  coinage. 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  347 

and  the  influence  of  the  spirits  is  supposed  to  be 
exerted  out  of  mere  caprice  or  malice. 

As  a  next  stage,  the  fundamental  fear  of  ghosts  and 
the  consequent  desire  to  propitiate  them  acquire 
an  organised  ritual  in  simple  forms  of  ancestor- 
worship,  such  as  the  Rev.  Mr.  Turner  describes 
among  the  people  of  Tanna  {I.e.  p.  88) ;  and  this 
line  of  development  may  be  followed  out  until  it 
attains  its  acme  in  the  State-theology  of  China 
and  the  Kami-theology  ^  of  Japan.  Each  of  these 
is  essentially  ancestor-worship,  the  ancestors  being 
reckoned  back  through  family  groups,  of  higher 
and  higher  order,  sometimes  with  strict  reference 
to  the  principle  of  agnation,  as  in  old  Rome ;  and, 
as  in  the  latter,  it  is  intimately  bound  up  with  the 
whole  organisation  of  the  State.  There  are  no 
idols;  inscribed  tablets  in  China,  and  strips  of 
paper  lodged  in  a  peculiar  portable  shrine  in  Japan, 
represent  the  souls  of  the  deceased,  or  the  special 
seats  which  they  occupy  when  sacrifices  are  offered 
by  their  descendants.  In  Japan  it  is  interesting 
to  observe  that  a  national  Kami — Ten-zio-dai-zin 
— is  worshipped  as  a  sort  of  Jahveh  by  the  nation 
in  general,  and  (as  Lippert  has  observed)  it  is 
singular  that  his  special  seat  is  a  portable  litter- 
like shrine,  termed  the  Mikosi,  in  some  sort  ana- 
logous to  the  Israeli  tic  ark.     In  China,  the  emperor 

^  "  Kami  "  is  used  in  the  sense  of  Elohim  ;  and  is  also,  like 
our  word  ''Lord,"  employed  as  a  title  of  respect  among  men,  as 
indeed  Elohim  was. 


848  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

is  the  representative  of  the  primitive  ancestors, 
and  stands,  as  it  were,  between  them  and  the 
supreme  cosmic  deities — Heaven  and  Earth — who 
are  superadded  to  them,  and  who  answer  to  the 
Tangaloa  and  the  Maui  of  the  Polynesians. 

Sciotheism,  under  the  form  of  the  deification  of 
ancestral  ghosts,  in  its  most  pronounced  form,  is 
therefore  the  chief  element  in  the  theology  of  a 
great  moiety,  possibly  of  more  than  half,  of  the 
human  race.  I  think  this  must  be  taken  to  be  a 
matter  of  fact— though  various  opinions  may  be 
held  as  to  how  this  ancestor -worship  came  about. 
But  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  no  less  a  matter  of 
fact  that  there  are  very  few  people  without 
additional  gods,  who  cannot,  with  certainty,  be 
accounted  for  as  deified  ancestors. 

With  all  respect  for  the  distinguished  au- 
thorities on  the  other  side,  I  cannot  find  good 
reasons  for  accepting  the  theory  that  the  cosmic 
deities — who  are  superadded  to  deified  ancestors 
even  in  China ;  who  are  found  all  over  Polynesia, 
in  Tangaloa  and  Maui,  and  in  old  Peru,  in  the  Sun 
— are  the  product  either  of  the  "  search  after  the 
infinite,"  or  of  mistakes  arisingout  of  the  confusion 
of  a  great  chief's  name  with  the  thing  signified  by 
the  name.  But,  however  this  may  be,  I  think  it 
is  again  merely  matter  of  fact  that,  among  a 
large  portion  of  mankind,  ancestor-worship  is  more 
or  less  thrown  into  the  background  either  by  such 
cosmic    deities,   or   by   tribal   gods   of  uncertain 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION    OF   THEOLOGY  349 

origin,  who  have  been  raised  to  eminence  by  the 
superiority  in  warfare,  or  otherwise,  of  their  wor- 
shippers. 

Among  certain  nations,  the  polytheistic  theology, 
thus   constituted,   has   become    modified   by   the 
selection  of  some  one  cosmic  or  tribal  god,  as  the 
only  god  to  whom  worship  is  due  on  the  part  of 
that  nation  (though  it  is  by  no  means  denied  that 
other  nations  have  a  right  to  worship  other  gods), 
and  thus  results  a  worship  of  one  God— mono latry, 
as  Wellhausen  calls   it— which  is  very  different 
from    genuine    monotheism.^     In    ancestral    scio- 
theism,  and  in  this  monolatry,  the  ethical  code, 
often    of  a   very   high    order,    comes   into   closer 
relation  with  the  theological  creed.     Morality  is 
taken  under  the  patronage  of  the  god  or  gods,  who 
reward  all  morally  good  conduct  and  punish  all 
morally  evil  conduct  in  this  world  or  the  next.     At 
the  same  time,  however,  they  are  conceived  to  be 
thoroughly  human,  and  they  visit  any  shadow  of 
disrespect  to  themselves,  shown  by  disobedience  to 
their  commands,  or  by  delay,  or  carelessness,  in 
carrying  them  out,  as  severely  as  any  breach  of 
the  moral  laws.     Piety  means  minute  attention  to 
the  due  performance  of  all  sacred  rites,  and  covers 
any  number  of  lapses  in  morality,  just  as  cruelty, 
treachery,  murder,  and  adultery  did  not  bar  David's 
claim  to  the  title  of  the  man  after  God's  own 

[1  The  Assyrians  thus  raised  Assnr  to  a  position  of  pro- 
eminence.] 


350  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

heart  among  the  Israelites ;  crimes  against  men 
may  be  expiated,  but  blasphemy  against  the  gods 
is  an  unpardonable  sin.  Men  forgive  all  injuries 
but  those  which  touch  their  self-esteem  ;  and  they 
make  their  gods  after  their  own  likeness,  in  their 
own  image  make  they  them. 

It  is  in  the  category  of  monolatry  that  I  conceive 
the  theology  of  the  old  Israelites  must  be  ranged. 
They  were  polytheists,  in  so  far  as  they  admitted 
the  existence  of  other  Elohim  of  divine  rank  beside 
Jahveh;  they  differed  from  ordinary  polytheists, 
in  so  far  as  they  believed  that  Jahveh  was  the 
supreme  god  and  the  one  proper  object  of  their 
own  national  worship.  But  it  will  doubtless  be 
objected  that  I  have  been  building  up  a  fictitious 
Israelitic  theology  on  the  foundation  of  the 
recorded  habits  and  customs  of  the  people,  when 
they  had  lapsed  from  the  ordinances  of  their  great 
lawgiver  and  prophet  Moses,  and  that  my  conclu- 
sions may  be  good  for  the  perverts  to  Canaanitish 
theology,  but  not  for  the  true  observers  of  the 
Sinaitic  legislation.  The  answer  to  the  objection 
is  that — so  far  as  I  can  form  a  judgment  of  that 
which  is  well  ascertained  in  the  history  of  Israel — 
there  is  very  little  ground  for  believing  that  we 
know  much,  either  about  the  theological  and 
social  value  of  the  influence  of  Moses,  or  about 
what  happened  during  the  w^anderings  in  the 
Desert 


VIII  THE  EVOLUTION   OF  THEOLOGY  351 

The  account  of  the  Exodus  and  of  the  occur- 
rences in  the  Sinaitic  peninsula ;  in  fact,  all  the 
history  of  Israel  before  the  invasion  of  Canaan,  ia 
full  of  wonderful  stories,  which  may  be  true,  in  so 
far  as  they  are  conceivable  occurrences,  but  which 
are  certainly  not  probable,  and  which  I,  for  one, 
decline  to  accept  until  evidence,  which  deserves 
that  name,  is  offered  of  their  historical  truth.  Up 
to  this  time  I  know  of  none.^  Furthermore,  I  see 
no  answer  to  the  argument  that  one  has  no  right  to 
pick  out  of  an  obviously  unhistorical  statement  the 
assertions  which  happen  to  be  probable  and  to  dis- 
card the  rest.  But  it  is  also  certain  that  a  primi- 
tively veracious  tradition  may  be  smothered  under 
subsequent  mythical  additions,  and  that  one  has  no 
right  to  cast  away  the  former  along  with  the 
latter.  Thus,  perhaps  the  fairest  way  of  stating 
the  case  may  be  as  follows. 

There  can  be  no  a  i^riori  objection  to  the  sup- 
position that  the  Israelites  were  delivered  from 
their  Egyptian  bondage  by  a  leader  called  Moses, 
and  that  he  exerted  a  great  influence  over  their 
subsequent  organisation  in  the  Desert.  There  is 
no  reason  to  doubt  that,  during  their  residence  in 
the  land  of  Goshen,  the  Israelites  knew  nothing 
of  Jahveh ;  but,  as  their  own  prophets  declare  (see 
Ezek.  XX.),  were  polytheistic  idolaters,  sharing  in 

^  I  refer  those  who  wish  to  know  the  reasons  which  lead  me 
to  take  up  this  position  to  the  works  of  Reuss  and  Wellhausen, 
[and  especially  to  Stade's  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel.} 


352  THE   EVOLUTION  OF  THEOLOGY  vill 

the  worst  practices  of  their  neighbours.  As  to 
their  conduct  in  other  respects,  nothing  is  known. 
But  it  may  fairly  be  suspected  that  their  ethics 
were  not  of  a  higher  order  than  those  of  Jacob, 
their  progenitor,  in  which  case  they  might  derive 
great  profit  from  contact  with  Egyptian  society, 
which  held  honesty  and  truthfulness  in  the  highest 
esteem.  Thanks  to  the  Egyptologers,  we  now 
know,  with  all  requisite  certainty,  the  moral 
standard  of  that  society  in  the  time,  and  long 
before  the  time,  of  Moses.  It  can  be  determined 
from  the  scrolls  buried  with  the  mummified  dead 
and  from  the  inscriptions  on  the  tombs  and 
memorial  statues  of  that  age.  For,  though  the 
lying  of  epitaphs  is  proverbial,  so  far  as  their 
subject  is  concerned,  they  gave  an  unmistakable 
insight  into  that  which  the  writers  and  the  readers 
of  them  think  praiseworthy. 

In  the  famous  tombs  at  Beni  Hassan  there  is  a 
record  of  the  life  of  Prince  Nakht,  who  served 
Osertasen  II.,  a  Pharaoh  of  the  twelfth  djTiasty 
as  governor  of  a  province.  The  inscription  speaks 
in  his  name:  "I  was  a  benevolent  and  kindly 
governor  who  loved  his  country.  .  .  .  Never  wag 
a  little  child  distressed  nor  a  widow  ill-treated  by 
me.  I  have  never  repelled  a  workman  nor  hindered 
a  shepherd.  I  gave  alike  to  the  widow  and  to 
the  married  woman,  and  have  not  preferred  the 
great  to  the  small  in  my  gifts."  And  we  have  the 
high  authority  of  the  late  Dr.  Samuel  Birch  for 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF  THEOLOGY  853 

the  statement  that  the  inscriptions  of  the  twelfth 
dynasty  abound  in  injunctions  of  a  high  ethical 
character.  "  To  feed  the  hungry,  give  drink  to  the 
thirsty,  clothe  the  naked,  bury  the  dead,  loyally 
serve  the  king,  formed  the  first  duty  of  a  pious 
man  and  faithful  subject."  ^  The  people  for  whom 
these  inscriptions  embodied  their  ideal  of  praise- 
worthiness  assuredly  had  no  imperfect  conception 
of  either  justice  or  mercy.  But  there  is  a  document 
which  gives  still  better  evidence  of  the  moral 
standard  of  the  Egyptians.  It  is  the  "  Book  of 
the  Dead,"  a  sort  of  "  Guide  to  Spiritland,"  the 
whole,  or  a  part,  of  which  was  buried  with  the 
mummy  of  every  well-to-do  Egyptian,  while  ex- 
tracts from  it  are  found  in  innumerable  inscrip- 
tions. Portions  of  this  work  are  of  extreme 
antiquity,  evidence  of  their  existence  occurring  as 
far  back  as  the  fifth  and  sixth  dynasties  ;  while  the 
125th  chapter,  which  constitutes  a  sort  of  book  by 
itself,  and  is  known  as  the  "  Book  of  Redemption 
in  the  Hall  of  the  two  Truths/'  is  frequently  in- 
scribed upon  coffins  and  other  monuments  of  the 
nineteenth  dynasty  (that  under  which,  there  is  some 
reason  to  believe,  the  Israelites  were  oppressed 
and  the  Exodus  took  place),  and  it  occurs,  more 
than  once,  in  the  famous  tombs  of  the  kings  of 
this  and  the  preceding  d3rnasty  at  Thebes.'^     This 

^  Bunsen,  Egypt's  Place,  vol.  v.  p.  129,  note. 
2  See  Bivch,  in  Egypt's  Place,  vol.  v.;   and  Brngsch,  History 
of  Egypt. 

112 


354  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  viii 

"  Book  of  Redemption  "  is  chiefly  occupied  by  the 
so-called    "  neg^ative    confession "    made    to    the 
forty-two  Divine  Judges,  in  which  the  soul  of  the 
dead   denies   that   he   has   committed    faults    of 
various  kinds.     It  is,  therefore,  obvious  that  the 
Egyptians  conceived  that  their  gods  commanded 
them  not  to  do  the  deeds  which  are  here  denied. 
The  "  Book  of  Redemption,"  in  fact,  implies  the 
existence  in  the  mind  of  the  Egyptians,  if  not  in 
a  formal  writing,  of  a  series  of  ordinances,  couched, 
like  the  majority  of  the  ten  commandments,  in 
negative   terms.     And   it   is   easy   to   prove   the 
implied  existence  of  a  series  which  nearly  answers 
to  the  "  ten  words."     Of  course  a  polytheistic  and 
image-worshipping  people,  who  observed  a  great 
many  holy  days,   but   no    Sabbaths,   could   have 
nothing  analogous  to  the  first  or  the  second  and 
the  fourth  commandments  of  the  Decalogue  ;  but 
answering  to  the  third,  is  "  I  have  not  blasphemed  ; " 
to  the  fifth,  "  I  have  not  reviled  the  face  of  the 
king  or  my  father;"  to  the  sixth,  "I   have  not 
murdered  ; "  to  the  seventh,  "  I  have  not  committed 
adultery ;  **  to  the  eighth,  "  I  have  not  stolen,"  "  I 
have  not  done  fraud  to  man  ; "  to  the  ninth,  "  I 
have  not  told  falsehoods  in  the  tribunal  of  truth," 
and,  further,  "  I  have  not  calumniated  the  slave  to 
his  master."     I  find  nothing  exactly  similar  to  the 
tenth  commandment ;  but  that  the  inward  dispo- 
sition of  mind  was  held  to  be  of  no  less  importance 
than  the  outward  act  is  to  be  gathered  from  the 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION    OF   THEOLOGY  355 

praises  of  kindliness  already  cited  and  tlie  cry  of 
"  I  am  pure,"  which  is  repeated  by  the  soul  on 
trial.  Moreover,  there  is  a  minuteness  of  detail  in 
the  confession  which  shows  no  little  delicacy  of 
moral  appreciation — "  I  have  not  privily  done  evil 
against  mankind,"  "I  have  not  afflicted  men," 
"  I  have  not  withheld  milk  from  the  mouths  of 
sucklings,"  "  I  have  not  been  idle,"  "  I  have  not 
played  the  hypocrite,"  "  I  have  not  told  falsehoods," 
"  I  have  not  corrupted  woman  or  man,"  "  I  have 
not  caused  fear,"  "  I  have  not  multiplied  words  in 
speaking." 

Would  that  the  moral  sense  of  the  nineteenth 
century  A.D.  were  as  far  advanced  as  that  of  the 
Egyptians  in  the  nineteenth  century  B.C.  in  this 
last  particular  !  What  incalculable  benefit  to  man- 
kind would  flow  from  strict  observance  of  the 
commandment,  "Thou  shalt  not  multiply  word  sin 
speaking!"  Nothing  is  more  remarkable  than 
the  stress  which  the  old  Egyptians,  here  and  else- 
where, lay  upon  this  and  other  kinds  of  truthful- 
ness, as  compared  with  the  absence  of  any  such 
requirement  in  the  Israelitic  Decalogue,  in  which 
only  a  specific  kind  of  untruthfulnes  is  forbidden. 

If,  as  the  story  runs,  Moses  was  adopted  by  a 
princess  of  the  royal  house,  and  was  instructed  in 
all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians,  it  is  surely  in- 
credible that  he  should  not  have  been  familiar 
from  his  youth  up,  with  the  high  moral  code 
implied   in   the    "  Book   of  Redemption."     It    ia 


356  THE  EVOLUTION    OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

surely  iinpossible  that  he  should  have  been  less 
familiar  with  the  complete  legal  system,  and  with 
the  method  of  administration  of  justice,  which, 
even  in  his  time,  had  enabled  the  Egyptian  people 
to  hold  together,  as  a  complex  social  organisation, 
for  a  period  far  longer  than  the  duration  of  old 
Roman  society,  from  the  building  of  the  city  to  the 
death  of  the  last  Caesar.  Nor  need  we  look  to 
Moses  alone  for  the  influence  ofEg3^tupon  Israel. 
It  is  true  that  the  Hebrew  nomads  who  came  into 
contact  with  the  Egyptians  of  Osertasen,  or  of 
Kamses,  stood  in  much  the  same  relation  to  them, 
in  point  of  culture,  as  a  Germanic  tribe  did  to  the 
Romans  of  Tiberius,  or  of  Marcus  Antoninus  ;  or  as 
Captain  Cook's  Omai  did  to  the  English  of  George 
the  Third.  But,  at  the  same  time,  any  difficulty 
of  communication  which  might  have  arisen  out  of 
this  circumstance  was  removed  by  the  long  pre- 
existing intercourse  of  other  Semites,  of  every 
grade  of  civilisation,  with  the  Egyptians.  In 
Mesopotamia  and  elsewhere,  as  in  Phenicia,  Semi- 
tic people  had  attained  to  a  social  organisation 
as  advanced  as  that  of  the  Egyptians  ;  Semites  had 
conquered  and  occupied  Lower  Egypt  for  cen- 
turies. So  extensively  had  Semitic  influences  pene- 
trated Egypt  that  the  Eg3rptian  language,  during 
the  period  of  the  nineteenth  dynasty,  is  said 
by  Brugsch  to  be  as  fuU  of  Semitisms  as  German  is 
of  Gallicisms ;  while  Semitic  deities  had  supplant- 
ed   the   Egj-ptian    gods   at    Heliopolis   and  else- 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION    OF   THEOLOGY  357 

where.     On  the  other  hand,  the  Semites,  as  far  as 
Phenicia,  were  extensively  influenced  by  Egypt. 

It  is  generally  admitted  ^  that  Moses,  Phinehas 
(and  perhaps  Aaron),  are  names  of  Egyptian  origin, 
and  there  is  excellent  authority  for  the  statement 
that  the  name  Abir,  which  the  Israelites  gave  to 
their  golden  calf,  and  which  is  also  used  to  signify 
the  strong,  the  heavenly,  and  even  God,^  is  simply 
the  Egyptian  Apis.  Brugsch  points  out  that  the 
god,  Turn  or  Tom,  who  was  the  special  object  of 
worship  in  the  city  of  Pi-Tom,  with  which  the 
Israelites  were  only  too  familiar,  was  called  Ankh 
and  the  "great  god,"  and  had  no  image.  Anhk 
means  "  He  who  lives,"  "  the  living  one,"  a  name 
the  resemblance  of  which  to  the  "  I  am  that  I 
am  "  of  Exodus  is  unmistakable,  whatever  may  be 
the  value  of  the  fact.  Every  discussion  of  Israel- 
itic  ritual  seeks  and  finds  the  explanation  of  its 
details  in  the  portable  sacred  chests,  the  altars, 
the  priestly  dress,  the  breastplate,  the  incense, 
and  the  sacrifices  depicted  on  the  monuments  of 
Egypt.  But  it  must  be  remembered  that  these 
signs  of  the  influence  of  Egypt  upon  Israel  are  not 
necessarily  evidence  that  such  influence  was 
exerted  before  the  Exodus.  It  may  have  come 
much  later,  through  the  close  connection  of  the 

1  Even  by  Graetz,  who,  thougli  a  fair  enough  historian, 
cannot  be  accused  of  any  desire  to  over-estimate  the  importance 
of  Egyptian  influence  upon  his  jjeople, 

2  Graetz,  Geschichte  der  Juden,  Bd.  i.  p.  370. 


358  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  viil 

Israel  of  David  and  Solomon,  first  with  Phenicia 
and  then  with  Egypt. 

If  we  suppose  Moses  to  have  been  a  man  of  the 
stamp  of  Calvin,  there  is  no  difficulty  in  conceiving 
that  he  may  have  constructed  the  substance  of 
the  ten  words,  and  even  of  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant,  which  curiously  resembles  parts  of 
the  Book  of  the  Dead,  from  the  foundation  of 
Egyptian  ethics  and  theology  which  had  filtered 
through  to  the  Israelites  in  general,  or  had  been 
furnished  specially  to  himself  by  his  early 
education;  just  as  the  great  Genevese  reformer 
built  up  a  puritanic  social  organisation  on  so  much 
as  remained  of  the  ethics  and  theology  of  the 
Roman  Church,  after  he  had  trimmed  them  to  his 
liking. 

Thus,  I  repeat,  I  see  no  a  friori  objection  to  the 
assumption  that  Moses  may  have  endeavoured  to 
give  his  people  a  theologico-political  organisation 
based  on  the  ten  commandments  (though  certainly 
not  quite  in  their  present  form)  and  the  Book  of 
the  Covenant,  contained  in  our  present  book  of 
Exodus.  But  whether  there  is  such  evidence  as 
amounts  to  proof,  or,  I  had  better  say,  to  prob- 
ability, that  even  this  much  of  the  Pentateuch 
owes  its  origin  to  Moses  is  another  matter.  The 
mythical  character  of  the  accessories  of  the 
Sinaitic  history  is  patent,  and  it  would  take  a 
good  deal  more  evidence  than  is  afforded  by  the 
bare  assertion  of  an  unknown  writer  to  justify  the 


vm      THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THEOLOGY     359 

belief  that  the  people  who  "saw  the  thundermgs 
and  the  lightnings  and  the  voice  of  the  trumpet 
and  the  mountain  smoking"  (Exod.  xx.    18);  to 
whom  Jahveh  orders  Moses  to  say,  "  Ye  yourselves 
have   seen   that   I   have   talked   with   yon   from 
heaven.     Ye  shall  not  make  other  gods  with  me  ; 
gods  of  silver  and  gods  of  gold  ye  shall  not  make 
unto   you"    {ibid.    22,  23),  should,  less  than  six 
weeks  afterwards,  have  done  the  exact  thing  they 
were   thus   awfully  forbidden  to  do.     Nor  is  the 
credibility  of  the  story  increased  by  the  statement 
that  Aaron,  the  brother  of  Moses,  the  witness  and 
fellow-worker  of  the  miracles  before  Pharaoh,  was 
their  leader  and  the  artificer  of  the  idol.     And  yet, 
at  the  same  time,  Aaron  was  apparently  so  ignorant 
of  wrongdoing  that  he  made  proclamation,  "  To- 
morrow shall  be  a  feast  to  Jahveh,"  and  the  people 
proceeded  to  offer  their  burnt-offerings  and  peace- 
offerings,  as   if  everything   in   their   proceedings 
must  be  satisfactory  to  the  Deity  with  whom  they 
had    just    made    a   solemn   covenant   to   abolish 
image-worship.     It  seems  to  me  that,  on  a  survey 
of  all  the  facts  of  the  case,  only  a  very  cautious 
and  hypothetical  judgment  is  justifiable.      It  may 
be    that    Moses    profited    by    the   opportunities 
afforded    him    of    access    to   what   was   best   m 
Egyptian  society  to  become  acquainted,  not  only 
wfth  its  advanced  ethical  and  legal  code,  but  with 
the   more   or  less  pantheistic  unification   of  the 
Divine  to  which  the  speculations  of  the  Egyptian 


360  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  Till 

thinkers,  like  those  of  all  polytheistic  philosophers, 
from  Polynesia  to  Greece,  tend;  if  indeed  the 
theology  of  the  period  of  the  nineteenth  d;yTiasty 
was  not,  as  some  Egyptologists  think,  a  modifica- 
tion of  an  earlier,  more  distinctly  monotheistic 
doctrine  of  a  long  antecedent  age.  It  took  only 
half  a  dozen  centuries  for  the  theology  of  Paul  to 
become  the  theology  of  Gregory  the  Great ;  and 
it  is  possible  that  twenty  centuries  lay  between 
the  theology  of  the  first  worshippers  in  the 
sanctuary  of  the  Sphinx  and  that  of  the  priests  of 
Bamses  Maimun. 

It  may  be  that  the  ten  commandments  and  the 
Book  of  the  Covenant  are  based  upon  faithful 
traditions  of  the  efforts  of  a  great  leader  to  raise 
his  followers  to  his  own  level.  For  myself,  as  a 
matter  of  pious  opinion,  I  like  to  think  so ;  as  I 
like  to  imagine  that,  between  Moses  and  Samuel, 
there  may  have  been  many  a  seer,  many  a  herds- 
man such  as  him  of  Tekoah,  lonely  amidst  the 
hills  of  Ephraim  and  Judah,  who  cherished  and 
kept  alive  these  traditions.  In  the  present  results 
of  Biblical  criticism,  however,  I  can  discover  no 
justification  for  the  common  assumption  that, 
between  the  time  of  Joshua  and  that  of  Rehoboam, 
the  Israelites  were  familiar  with  either  the 
Deuteronomic  or  the  Levitical  legislation ;  or  that 
the  theology  of  the  Israelites,  from  the  king  who 
sat  on  the  throne  to  the  lowest  of  his  subjects,  was 
in  any  important  respect  different  from  that  which 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION    OF   THEOLOGY  361 

might  naturally  be  expected  from  their  previous 
history  and  the  conditions  of  their  existence.  But 
there  is  excellent  evidence  to  the  contrary  effect. 
And,  for  my  part,  I  see  no  reason  to  doubt  that, 
like  the  rest  of  the  world,  the  Israelites  had  passed 
through  a  period  of  mere  ghost-worship,  and  had 
advanced  through  Ancestor-worship  and  Fetishism 
and  Totemism  to  the  theological  level  at  which  we 
find  them  in  the  books  of  Judges  and  Samuel. 

All  the  more  remarkable,  therefore,  is  the  extra- 
ordinary change  which  is  to  be  noted  in  the 
eighth  century  B.C.  The  student  who  is  familiar 
with  the  theology  implied,  or  expressed,  in  the 
books  of  Judges,  Samuel,  and  the  first  book  of 
Kings,  finds  himself  in  a  new  world  of  thought, 
in  the  full  tide  of  a  great  reformation,  when  he 
reads  Joel,  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  Micah,  and 
Jeremiah. 

The  essence  of  this  change  is  the  reversal  of  the 
position  which,  in  primitive  society,  ethics  holds  in 
relation  to  theology.  Originally,  that  which  men 
worship  is  a  theological  hypothesis,  not  a  moral 
ideal.  The  prophets,  in  substance,  if  not  always 
in  form,  preach  the  opposite  doctrine.  They  are 
constantly  striving  to  free  the  moral  ideal  from  the 
stifling  embrace  of  the  current  theology  and  its 
concomitant  ritual.  Theirs  was  not  an  intellectual 
criticism,  argued  on  strictly  scientific  grounds  ;  the 
image-worshippers  and  the  believers  in  the  efficacy 


302  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  Till 

of  sacrifices  and  ceremonies  might  logically  have 
held  their  own  against  anything  the  prophets 
have  to  say;  it  was  an  ethical  criticism.  From 
the  height  of  his  moral  intuition — that  the  whole 
duty  of  mar)  is  to  do  justice  and  to  love  mercy  and 
to  bear  himself  as  humbly  as  befits  his  insignifi- 
cance in  face  of  the  Infinite — the  prophet  simply 
laughs  at  the  idolaters  of  stocks  and  stones  and 
the  idolaters  of  ritual.  Idols  of  the  first  kind,  in 
his  experience,  were  inseparably  united  with  the 
practice  of  immorality,  and  they  were  to  be  ruth- 
lessly destroyed.  As  for  sacrifices  and  ceremonies, 
whatever  their  intrinsic  value  might  be,  they  might 
be  tolerated  on  condition  of  ceasing  to  be  idols ; 
they  might  even  be  praiseworthy  on  condition  of 
being  made  to  subserve  the  worship  of  the  true 
Jahveh — the  moral  ideal. 

If  the  realm  of  David  had  remained  undivided, 
if  the  Assyrian  and  the  Chaldean  and  the 
Egyptian  had  left  Israel  to  the  ordinary  course  of 
development  of  an  Oriental  kingdom,  it  is  possible 
that  the  effects  of  the  reforming  zeal  of  the  pro- 
phets of  the  eighth  and  seventh  centuries  might 
have  been  effaced  by  the  growth,  according  to  its 
inevitable  tendencies,  of  the  theology  which  they 
combated.  But  the  captivity  made  the  fortune 
of  the  ideas  which  it  was  the  privilege  of  these 
men  to  launch  upon  an  endless  career.  With  the 
abolition  of  the  Temple-services  for  more  than  half 
a  century,  the  priest  must  have  lost  and  the  scribe 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  303 

gained  influence.  The  puritanism  of  a  vigorous 
minority  among  the  Babylonian  Jews  rooted  out 
polytheism  from  all  its  hiding-places  in  the  theo- 
logy which  they  had  inherited ;  they  created  the 
first  consistent,  remorseless,  naked  monotheism, 
which,  so  far  as  history  records,  appeared  in  the 
world  (for  Zoroastrism  is  practically  ditheism,  and 
Buddhism  any-theism  or  no-theism) ;  and  they 
inseparably  united  therewith  an  ethical  code, 
which,  for  its  purity  and  for  its  efficiency  as  a 
bond  of  social  life,  was  and  is,  unsurpassed.  So  I 
think  we  must  not  judge  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  and 
their  followers  too  hardly,  if  they  exemplified  the 
usual  doom  of  poor  humanity  to  escape  from  one 
error  only  to  fall  into  another ;  if  they  failed  to 
free  themselves  as  completely  from  the  idolatry  of 
ritual  as  they  had  from  that  of  images  and  dogmas ; 
if  they  cherished  the  new  fetters  of  the  Levitical 
legislation  which  they  had  fitted  upon  themselves 
and  their  nation,  as  though  such  bonds  had  the 
sanctity  of  the  obligations  of  morality  ;  and  if  they 
led  succeeding  generations  to  spend  their  best 
energies  in  building  that  "  hedge  round  the  Torah  " 
which  was  meant  to  preserve  both  ethics  and 
theology,  but  which  too  often  had  the  effect  of 
pampering  the  latter  and  starving  the  former. 
The  world  being  what  it  was,  it  is  to  be  doubted 
whether  Israel  would  have  preserved  intact  the 
pure  ore  of  religion,  which  the  prophets  had 
extracted  for  the  use  of  mankind  as  well  as  for 


364  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  viil 

their  nation,  had  not  the  leaders  of  the  nation 
been  zealous,  even  to  death,  for  the  dross  of  the  la-w- 
in which  it  was  embedded.  The  struggle  of  the 
Jews,  under  the  Maccabean  house,  against  the 
Seleucidae  -yv^as  as  important  for  mankind  as  that  of 
the  Greeks  against  the  Persians.  And,  of  all  the 
strange  ironies  of  history,  perhaps  the  strangest 
is  that "  Pharisee  "  is  current,  as  a  term  of  reproach, 
among  the  theological  descendants  of  that  sect  of 
Nazarenes  who,  without  the  martjrr  spirit  of  those 
primitive  Puritans,  would  never  have  come  into 
existence.  They,  like  their  historical  successors, 
our  own  Puritans,  have  shared  the  general  fate  of 
the  poor  wise  men  who  save  cities. 

A  criticism  of  theology  from  the  side  of  science 
is  not  thought  of  by  the  prophets,  and  is  at  most 
indicated  in  the  books  of  Job  and  Ecclesiastes,  in 
both  of  which  the  problem  of  vindicating  the  ways 
of  God  to  man  is  given  up,  though  on  different 
grounds,  as  a  hopeless  one.  But  with  the  ex- 
tensive introduction  of  Greek  thought  among  the 
Jews,  which  took  place,  not  only  during  the 
domination  of  the  Seleucida?  in  Palestine,  but  in 
the  great  Judaic  colony  which  flourished  in 
Egypt  under  the  Ptolemies,  criticism,  on  both 
ethical  and  scientific  grounds,  took  a  new  depar- 
ture. 

In  the  hands  of  the  Alexandrian  Jews,  as  repre- 
sented by  Philo,  the  fundamental  axiom  of  later 
Jewish,  as  of  Christian  monotheism,  that  the  Deity 


366      THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THEOLOGY 


vm 


was  too  thorough  an  Israelite  and  too  much  the 
child  of  his  time  to  be  content  with  this  agnostic 
position.  With  the  help  of  the  Platonic  and 
Stoic  philosophy,  he  constructed  an  apprehensible, 
if  not  comprehensible,  quasi-deity  out  of  the 
Logos ;  while  other  more  or  less  personified  divine 
powers,  or  attributes,  bridged  over  the  interval 
between  God  and  man;  between  the  sacred 
existence,  too  pure  to  be  called  by  any  name  which 
impHed  a  conceivable  quality,  and  the  gross  and 
evil  worl^  of  matter.  In  order  to  get  over  the 
ethical  difficulties  presented  by  the  naive  natural- 
ism of  many  parts  of  those  Scriptures,  in  the 
divine  authority  of  Avhich  he  firmly  believed, 
Philo  borrowed  from  the  Stoics  (who  liad  been  in 
like  straits  in  respect  of  Greek  m3^thology),  that 
great  Excalibur  which  they  had  forged  with 
infinite  pains  and  skill — the  method  of  allegorical 
interpretation.  This  mighty  "  two-handed  engine 
at  the  door"  of  the  theologian  is  warranted  to 
make  a  speedy  end  of  any  and  every  moral  or 
intellectual  difficulty,  by  showing  that,  taken 
allegorically  or,  as  it  is  otherwise  said, "  poetically  " 
or,  "in  a  spiritual  sense,"  the  plainest  words  mean 
whatever  a  pious  interpreter  desires  they  should 
mean.  In  Biblical  phrase,  Zeno  (who  probably 
had  a  strain  of  Semitic  blood  in  him)  was  the 
"  father  of  all  such  as  reconcile."  No  doubt  Philo 
and  his  followers  were  eminently  religious  men; 
but  they  did  endless  injury  to  the  cause  of  religion 


VIII  THE  EVOLUTION    OF    THEOLOGY  365 

is  infinitely  perfect  and  infinitely  good,  worked 
itself  out  into  its  logical  consequence — agnostic 
theism.  Pliilo  will  allow  of  no  point  of  contact 
between  God  and  a  world  in  which  evil  exists. 
For  him  God  has  no  relation  to  space  or  to  time, 
and,  as  infinite,  suffers  no  predicate  beyond  that 
of  existence.  It  is  therefore  absurd  to  ascribe  to 
Him  mental  faculties  and  affections  comparable  in 
the  remotest  degree  to  those  of  men ;  He  is  in  no 
way  an  object  of  cognition;  He  is  airoLo^  and 
aKaToXrjKTOf;  ^ — without  quality  and  incomprehen- 
sible. That  is  to  say  the  Alexandrian  Jew  of  the 
first  century  had  anticipated  the  reasonings  of 
Hamilton  and  Mansell  in  the  nineteenth,  and,  for 
him,  God  is  the  Unknowable  in  the  sense  in  which 
that  term  is  used  by  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer.  More- 
over, Philo's  definition  of  the  Supreme  Being 
would  not  be  inconsistent  with  that  "  substantia 
constans  infinitis  attributis,  quorum  unumquodque 
seternam  et  infinitam  essentiam  exprimit,"  given  by 
another  great  Israelite,  were  it  not  that  Spinoza's 
doctrine  of  the  immanence  of  the  Deity  in  the 
world  puts  him,  at  any  rate  formally,  at  the 
antipodes  of  theological  sj^eculation.  But  the 
conception  of  the  essential  incognoscibility  of  the 
Deity  is  the  same  in  each  case.     However,  Philo 

1  See  the  careful  analsyis  of  the  work  of  the  Alexandrian 
philosopher  and  theologian  (who,  it  should  be  remembered,  waa 
a  most  devout  Jew,  held  in  the  highest  esteem  by  his  country- 
men) in  Siegfried's  Phi/c  von  Alexandrien,  1875.  [Also  Dr.  J. 
Drummond's  PMlo  JudcBUs,  1888.] 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THKOLOGY  oG7 

by  laying  the  foundations  of  a  new  theology,  while 
equipping  the  defenders  of  it  with  the  subtlest 
of  all  weapons  of  offence  and  defence,  and  with  an 
inexhaustible  store  of  sophistical  arguments  of  the 
most  plausible  aspect. 

The  question  of  the  real  bearing  upon  theology 
of  the  influence  exerted  by  the  teaching  of  Philo's 
contemporary,  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  is  one  upon 
which  it  is  not  germane  to  my  present  purpose  to 
enter.  I  take  it  simply  as  an  unquestionable  fact 
that  his  immediate  disciples,  known  to  their 
countrymen  as  *' Nazarenes,"  were  regarded  as, 
and  considered  themselves  to  be,  perfectly  orthodox 
Jews,  belonging  to  the  puritanic  or  pharisaic 
section  of  their  people,  and  differing  from  the  rest 
only  in  their  belief  that  the  Messiah  had  already 
come.  Christianity,  it  is  said,  first  became  clearly 
differentiated  at  Antioch,  and  it  separated  itself 
from  orthodox  Judaism  by  denying  the  obligation 
of  the  rite  of  circumcision  and  of  the  food  pro- 
hibitions, prescribed  by  the  law.  Henceforward 
theology  became  relatively  stationary  among  the 
Jews,^  and  the  history  of  its  rapid  progress  in  a 
new   course  .of  evolution   is    the    history   of  the 

^  I  am  not  unaware  of  the  existence  of  many  and  widely 
divergent  sects  and  schools  among  the  Jews  at  all  periods  of 
their  history,  since  the  dis]>ersion.  But  I  imagine  that  orthodox 
Judaism  is  now  pretty  much  what  it  was  in  Ihilo's  time  ;  while 
Peter  and  Paul,  if  they  could  return  to  life,  would  certainly 
have  to  learn  the  catechism  of  either  the  Roman,  Greek,  or 
Anglican  Churches,  if  they  desired  to  be  considered  orthodox 
Christians 


368      THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THEOLOGY      vm 

Christian  Churches,  orthodox  and  heterodox.  The 
steps  in  this  evolution  are  obvious.  The  first  is 
the  birth  of  a  new  theoloorical  scheme  arisinor  out 
of  the  union  of  elements  derived  from  Greek 
philosophy  with  elements  derived  from  Israelitic 
theology.  In  the  fourth  Gospel,  the  Logos,  raised 
to  a  somewhat  higher  degree  of  personification 
than  in  the  Alexandrian  theosophy,  is  identified 
with  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  In  the  Epistles,  especially 
tlie  later  of  those  attributed  to  Paul,  the  Israelitic 
ideas  of  the  Messiah  and  of  sacrificial  atonement 
coalesce  with  one  another  and  with  the  embodiment 
of  the  Logos  in  Jesus,  until  the  apotheosis  of  the 
Son  of  man  is  almost,  or  quite,  effected.  The 
history  of  Christian  dogma,  from  Justin  to 
Athanasius,  is  a  record  of  continual  progress  in  the 
same  direction,  until  the  fair  body  of  religion, 
revealed  in  almost  naked  purity  by  the  prophets, 
is  once  more  hidden  under  a  new  accumulation  of 
dogmas  and  of  ritual  practices  of  which  the 
primitive  Nazarene  knew  nothing  ;  and  which  he 
would  probably  have  regarded  as  blasphemous  if 
he  could  have  been  made  to  understand  them. 

As,  century  after  century,  the  ages  roll  on,  poly- 
theism comes  back  under  the  disguise  of  Mariolatry 
and  the  adoration  of  saints;  image-worship  becomes 
as  rampant  as  in  old  Egypt ;  adoration  of  relics 
takes  the  place  of  the  old  fetish-worship;  the 
virtues  of  the  ephod  pale  before  those  of  holy 
coats   and   handkerchiefs;    shrines   and   calvaries 


VIII  THE  EVOLUTION    OF   THEOLOGY  3G9 

make  up  for  the  loss  of  the  ark  and  of  the  high 
places ;  and  even  the  lustral  fluid  of  paganism  is  re- 
placed by  holy  water  at  the  porches  of  the  temples. 
A  touching  ceremony — the  common  meal  originally 
eaten  in  pious  memory  of  a  loved  teacher — becomes 
metamorphosed  into  a  flesh  and -blood  sacrifice, 
supposed  to  possess  exactly  that  redeeming  virtue 
which  the  prophets  denied  to  the  flesh-and-blood 
sacrifices  of  their  day ;  while  the  minute  observ- 
ance .  of  ritual  is  raised  to  a  degree  of  punctilious 
refinement  which  Levitical  legislators  might  envy. 
And  with  the  growth  of  this  theology,  grew  its 
inevitable  concomitant,  the  belief  in  evil  spirits,  in 
possession,  in  sorcery,  in  charms  and  omens,  until 
the  Christians  of  the  twelfth  century  after  our 
era  were  sunk  in  more  debased  and  brutal  super- 
stitions than  are  recorded  of  the  Israelites  in  the 
twelfth  century  before  it. 

The  greatest  men  of  the  Middle  Ages  are  unable 
to  escape  the  infection.  Dante's  "  Inferno  "  would 
be  revolting  if  it  were  not  so  often  sublime,  so 
often  exquisitely  tender.  The  hideous  pictures 
which  cover  a  vast  space  on  the  south  wall  of  the 
Campo  Santo  of  Pisa  convey  information,  as  terrible 
as  it  is  indisputable,  of  the  theological  conceptions 
of  Dante's  countrymen  in  the  fourteenth  century, 
whose  eyes  were  addressed  by  the  painters  of 
those  disgusting  scenes,  and  whose  approbation 
they  knew  how  to  win.  A  candid  Mexican  of 
the   time    of  Cortez,   could   he    have   seen   this 

113 


370  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  vill 

Christian  burial-place,  would  have  taken  it  for  an 
appropriately  adorned  Teocalli.  The  professed 
disciple  of  the  God  of  justice  and  of  mercy  might 
there  gloat  over  the  sufferings  of  his  fellowmen 
depicted  as  undergoing  every  extremity  of  atrocious 
and  sanguinary  torture  to  all  eternity,  for  theo- 
logical errors  no  less  than  for  moral  delinquencies  ; 
while,  in  the  central  figure  of  Satan,^  occupied  in 
champing  up  souls  in  his  capacious  and  well- 
toothed  jaws,  to  void  them  a.gain  for  the  purpose 
of  undergoing  fresh  suffering,  we  have  the  counter- 
part of  the  strange  Polynesian  and  Egyptian 
dogma  that  there  were  certain  gods  who  employed 
themselves  in  devouring  the  ghostly  flesh  of  the 
spirits  of  the  dead.  But  injustice  to  the  Polynesians, 
it  must  be  recollected  that,  after  three  such  opera- 
tions, they  thought  the  soul  was  purified  and 
liappy.  In  the  view  of  the  Christian  theologian 
the  operation  was  only  a  preparation  for  new 
tortures  continued  for  ever  and  aye. 

With  the  growth  of  civilisation  in  Europe,  and 
with  the  revival  of  letters  and  of  science  in  the 


'  Dante's   description    of   Lucifer    engaged    in  the  eternal 
mastication  of  Brutus,  Cassius,  and  Judas  Iscariot — 
"  Da  ogni  bocca  dirompea  co'  denti 
Un  peceatore,  a  guisa  di  maciulla, 
Si  die  tre  ue  facea  cosi  dolenti. 
A  quel  dinanzi  il  mordere  era  nulla, 

Verso  '1  graffiar,  che  tal  volta  la  scliiena 
Rimanea  della  pelle'tutta  bruUa  " — 
is  quite  in   harmony   with   the   Pisau   picture   and    perfectly 
Polynesian  in  conception. 


VIII  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  871 

fourteenth  and  fifteentli  centuries,  the  ethical  and 
intellectual  criticism  of  theology  once  more  recom- 
menced, and  arrived  at  a  temporary  resting-place 
in  the  confessions  of  the  various  reformed  Pro- 
testant sects  in  the  sixteenth  century ;  almost  all 
of  which,  as  soon  as  they  were  strong  enough, 
began  to  persecute  those  who  carried  criticism 
beyond  their  own  limit.  But  the  movement  was 
not  arrested  by  these  ecclesiastical  barriers,  as 
their  constructors  fondly  imagined  it  would  be ;  it 
was  continued,  tacitly  or  openly,  by  Galileo,  by 
Hobbes,  by  Descartes,  and  especially  by  Spinoza, 
in  the  seventeenth  century  ;  by  the  English  Free- 
thinkers, by  Rousseau,  by  the  French  Encyclo- 
paedists, and  by  the  German  Rationalists,  among 
whom  Lessing  stands  out  a  head  and  shoulders 
taller  than  the  rest,  throuo^hout  the  eio^hteenth 
century ;  by  the  historians,  the  philologers,  the 
Biblical  critics,  the  geologists,  and  the  biologists 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  until  it  is  obvious  to 
all  who  can  see  that  the  moral  sense  and  the 
really  scientific  method  of  seeking  for  truth  are 
once  more  predominating  over  false  science.  Once 
more  ethics  and  theology  are  parting  company. 

It  is  my  conviction  that,  with  the  spread  of  true 
scientific  culture,  whatever  may  be  the  medium, 
historical,  philological,  philosophical,  or  physical, 
through  which  that  culture  is  conveyed,  and  with 
its  necessary  concomitant,  a  constant  elevation  of 
the  standard  of  veracity,  the  end  of  the  evolution 


372  THE   EVOLUTION   OF   THEOLOGY  viii 

of  theology  will  be  like  its  beginning — it  will 
cease  to  have  any  relation  to  ethics.  I  suppose 
that,  so  long  as  the  human  mind  exists,  it  will  not 
escape  its  deep-seated  instinct  to  personify  its 
intellectual  conceptions.  The  science  of  the 
present  day  is  as  full  of  this  particular  form  of 
intellectual  shadow-worship  as  is  the  nescience  of 
ignorant  ages.  The  difference  is  that  the  philoso- 
pher who  is  worthy  of  the  name  knows  that  his 
personified  hypotheses,  such  as  law,  and  force, 
and  ether,  and  the  like,  are  merely  useful  sjinbols, 
while  the  ignorant  and  the  careless  take  them  for 
adequate  expressions  of  reality.  So,  it  may  be, 
that  the  majority  of  mankind  may  find  the  practice 
of  morality  made  easier  by  the  use  of  theological 
symbols.  And  unless  these  are  converted  from 
s}Tiibols  into  idols,  I  do  not  see  that  science  has 
an}i:hing  to  say  to  the  practice,  except  to  give  an 
occasional  warning  of  its  dangers.  But,  when 
such  symbols  are  dealt  with  as  real  existences,  I 
think  the  highest  duty  which  is  laid  upon  men  of 
science  is  to  show  that  these  dogmatic  idols  have 
no  greater  value  than  the  fabrications  of  men's 
hands,  the  stocks  and  the  stones,  which  they  have 
replaced. 


END    OF  VOL.  IV. 


l^-^^f^-* 


:'';  Ti":^,;^||^:<^-. 


««H^ 


>.V-:».*Mf:- 


.:##.^-  ^ 


:;^  1?^' -i:;^ 


